Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[oldtimer]

This entire Ukraine joining NATO is a classic deadlock

a) Ukraine cannot join NATO until the war with Russia ends
b) Russia will not end the war with Ukraine unless Ukraine promises not to join NATO
c) The deadlock of a) and b) could be broken by the collapse of Ukraine which would remove the political basis of Ukraine joining NATO
d) The deadlock of a) and b) could also be broken by regime change in Russia in which case there is not more need for Ukraine to join NATO

I've highlighted in bold a giant error in your calculations.

I think it's a catch 22 situation that prevents a political solution.

Russia can never end the war, because the moment it ends America gets Ukraine officially and forever.

America can never invite Ukraine as long as the war goes on, because the moment it's in they make the unofficial war with Russia into an official one.

So I guess that the undeclared war lasts forever, just like the war between Israel and the Palestinians.

[oldtimer]

You know how in a Crusader Kings game you could have a load of really awesome knights with high prowess but then you launch an ill-planned out war and lose some battles and a lot of those really awesome knights get killed and you have to replace them with not so great knights and then those knights also get killed in a higher rate due to that in future battles?

I think the equivalent of that is happening to Russian commanders.

The Marxist and post-Marxist system brings to the top not tough knights, but those who are good at stealing and cheating, even when it's suicidal for their line of work, or at least they do not prevent others from doing it. A competent specialist is a person with nous, and nous is the main enemy of post-Marxists (Marxists at least came up with ways to attract reasonable people and then fool them, post-Marxists just destroy people's thinking promptly).

Marxism, Crusader Kings ?

I'm sorry people this is a Wendy's (or at least a thread about a real War).

[oldtimer]

Marxism, Crusader Kings ?

I'm sorry people this is a Wendy's (or at least a thread about a real War).

Everything is simple here: the modern Russian government consists of post-Marxists. Not at all in the sense of that toothless term that simply refers to the branch of the Social Democrats after the World Revolution of 1968, but in the sense of the mutation of the Marxists, which happened already in the twenties and thirties and is accurately illustrated in Animal Farm: A Fairy Story. After Stalin in the USSR, they tried to return to orthodox Marxism, but nationalism, conservatism, reactionism and, oddly enough, anti-communism still sprouted on it from the sixties.

And Virgin Einzige vs. Chad bronz mentioned a Crusader Kings game just to illustrate the idea that the most competent personnel of the Russian army died at the beginning of a full-scale war.

Post-Marxists ?

World Revolution ?

Virgin Einzige vs. Chad bronz ?

Crusader Kings ?

I think we should all get out more.

As to my personal opinion, I think the best trained russian soldiers died early in the war, but their generals also sucked the most early in the war.

[oldtimer]

In dreamland, Ukraine gets everything on its wish list and solves all its issues successfully.
In the real world compromise and realpolitik reign more often than not and what you want and what you get are two distinct things.
Ukraine's leadership is right to be pushy, but some kind of post-war relationship with Russia is inevitable, the question is what tenor it has and what it focuses on. This war will partially decide that, and post-war needs will also partially decide that.  If we treat Ukraine poorly enough, it might find itself having to get closer to Russia (relatively), and it might be mutually beneficial too (for both UA and RU).

After the war, Ukraine can easily enter the sphere of the PRC: in spite of everything, the Ukrainian government sees no obstacles to this. As for relations with Russia, until February 24, 2023, Ukrainians and Russians cooperated very well at the international level (for example, I participated in the Ukrainian Uzhgorod club of tabletop role-playing games, which had members throughout the CIS, but was closed on February 24 due to the fact that its founders became military volunteers), but it is unlikely that in the next fifty years it will be possible to restore what was destroyed just on February 24.

Even after 2014 it was impossible to imagine a full-scale war between Ukrainians and Russians, these two peoples ruled together in the Soviet Union and did not distinguish each other by nationality. Especially when you consider that a large number of Russians have Ukrainian surnames and a large number of Ukrainians have Russian. February 24 erased the history of their relationship, now we are in a new reality.

China is by tradition isolationist, even when a color revolution happened in Kazakhstan they didn't even make a tweet, they don't lift a finger for anyone even if they come begging. That's why they have no allies or even spheres.

As for the rest it's also false, war between Russia and Ukraine was inevitable since the summer of 1991, it was largerly feared over the 1990's that it would be over Crimea, and it got close in 1992-93, the 1994 Budapest Treaty temporarily defused things until Poland became too strong.

A general state of war in the former USSR was always considered inevitable as typical post-colonial conflicts, same reasons (badly drawn borders) it's just the size that's different.

[oldtimer]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

Polling wasn't great for the Chechen wars for Yeltsin in the 1990s. There is historical precedent for something like this polling dip. For perhaps a majority of the 1990s the Chechen Wars were quite unpopular.
If and when declining approvals have a very significant impact on Putin's strategies might be anyone's guess, however.

When you lose a war you become unpopular, it always happens.

I doubt that Putin has a military strategy that's worth anything.

He still keeps people that could easily be American agents (where else all those details about even blood supplies could have come from on the eve of the war) and are definitely terrible at their official job.

He obviously suffers from Roman Emperor disease, which happens when someone is in power for too long.

[oldtimer]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

Polling wasn't great for the Chechen wars for Yeltsin in the 1990s. There is historical precedent for something like this polling dip. For perhaps a majority of the 1990s the Chechen Wars were quite unpopular.
If and when declining approvals have a very significant impact on Putin's strategies might be anyone's guess, however.

When you lose a war you become unpopular, it always happens.

I doubt that Putin has a military strategy that's worth anything.

He still keeps people that could easily be American agents (where else all those details about even blood supplies could have come from on the eve of the war) and are definitely terrible at their official job.

He obviously suffers from Roman Emperor disease, which happens when someone is in power for too long.

If this is what is happening...all while he's actually still in a winning position...I doubt he would like to see what happens if Ukraine manages to fight it back all the way to pre-2022 lines, or even takes Crimea. Of course, if he shifted blame on the West for this, and convinced them America was to blame, that could be a safety valve allowing him more room to operate.
He's definitely not at the height of his abilities, that much is pretty clear.

Lets put in simple terms the events of the past month.

Putin is the biggest obstacle for Russia to win this war, but also was the biggest obstacle to any political settlement until this NATO summit happened.

There is no prospect of victory or peace for his country while he is in charge of it.

However America's commitment to give Ukraine NATO membership the moment the war ends means there can be no peace.
Russia will continue to fight regardless of Ukraine pushing back to the 1991 line.

Now it's like the Palestinian conflict.
The change of leaders will not bring peace, you need a change in policy from both sides that accomodates nationalists from both sides.

How do you get it ?
I envision a type of Dayton Accord, like Ukraine becoming super-Bosnia without the High Representative (unless it alternates between Russia and America).

[oldtimer]

https://news.yahoo.com/law-moves-ukrainian-christmas-jan-114800447.html

"New law moves Ukrainian Christmas from Jan 7 to Dec 25, other holidays changed too"

I think this is not a smart move.  It hands Putin more ammo in his narrative: "This is a war for Russian civilization.  If Russia loses it is the end of Russian civilization"

The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople celebrates Christmas on December 25th. If the Russian Orthodox Church considers itself superior to the Church of Constantinople, then active support of the perfidious criminal war is not its only sin.

(Warning this is a sarcastic post)

Everyone knows the real Christmas is on Dec 21st.

If you think of it Christmas was supposed to be connected astronomically with the Winter Solstice, but the dates drifted from the Julian and Gregorian Calendars.

Infact even Friday the 13th should be Sunday the 25th because of the calendar switches and drifts, but Hollywood has never made a movie about Sunday the 25th.

(End of sarcastic post)
 

[oldtimer]

I wonder what the poll results would be if the public were informed that Russia was the first to use them and has been using cluster bombs on Ukraine, and that those bearing the risk of unexploded ordinance are the Ukrainian civilians, not Russian ones.

I think it will still be a proxy of Biden's approval rating like any generic presidential policy.

[oldtimer]

George Kennan in 1998 as someone in the Putin camp

...

Yes, of course, Putin decided to annex Ukraine (the place that is not really a country and was part of Rus back in the Middle Ages), because of NATO expansion. Garbage. I wonder what Kennan would say now. All we have now is that fossil Kissinger, and his schtick is as a PRC symp, so he's busy.

I believe their problem was having only Poland in, but not Russia in.

America invited both Greece and Turkey in NATO at the same time, because it knew that inviting only one guaranteed war with the other.

Same reason for having Britain, France, and Germany on the same team.

So inviting only Poland in NATO, meant war with Russia down the line.

[oldtimer]

UK MoD now blames "weeds and shrubs" for slow Ukraine advance
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F2nJwsPbUAAnbrH?format=jpg&name=small

What do you expect? Last major war they fought was against 19-year old Argentine conscripts in some rocky island. Probably hard for them to imagine a war of this magnitude.

The Falklands War was great victory for Britain.

Imagine having to invade a place on the other side of the world in the middle of an icy ocean in winter, while the other side was nearby and already entrenched.

All that during a major economic and political crisis, with millions unemployed and most cities in ruins, victory gave people hope and pride when they had none.

Russia has it easy, it's right next door and their economy is not in total shambles.
It's just that Putin is not as ruthless or determined as Thatcher, to "sink the Belgrano" and win.

[oldtimer]

George Kennan in 1998 as someone in the Putin camp

...

Yes, of course, Putin decided to annex Ukraine (the place that is not really a country and was part of Rus back in the Middle Ages), because of NATO expansion. Garbage. I wonder what Kennan would say now. All we have now is that fossil Kissinger, and his schtick is as a PRC symp, so he's busy.

I believe their problem was having only Poland in, but not Russia in.

America invited both Greece and Turkey in NATO at the same time, because it knew that inviting only one guaranteed war with the other.

Same reason for having Britain, France, and Germany on the same team.

So inviting only Poland in NATO, meant war with Russia down the line.

Russia wanted to join NATO?  Anyway, the idea that Putin went wild because Poland was in NATO is equally incredible.

It's a matter of long-term foreign policy.

If 2 sides are inevitably going to go into conflict and you don't want to get drawn into it, you either stay away or invite both in to play referee.

In the case of Greece and Turkey : Cyprus and the Aegean.
In the case of Poland and Russia : Eastern Europe.

So if America wanted to avoid getting into a war it had to choose between inviting none or both.

In 1998 it was perfectly possible to invite both.
 
Now Poland will always veto, and there will always be conflict between Russia and Poland over Eastern Europe, which will drag NATO and the EU in even if it's other members don't want to.

[oldtimer]

More on Russian labor issues:

Russia is resorting to desperate measures to recruit soldiers

Trickery and coercion are the Kremlin’s methods

https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/08/01/russia-is-resorting-to-desperate-measures-to-recruit-soldiers

Putin is getting desperate. I copy and paste the final paragraph:

“One limiting factor in the mobilisation is the number of training centres. Even more acute is the shortage of officers. This is why the Kremlin raised the age of former professionals who can be called up to the age of 65. Pavel Luzin, a visiting scholar at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, says that “they are combing through the last Soviet generation.”

Potential cannon fodder of Russia:

Lek! Leka!

That's what I find weird in this War.

Both sides are estimated to have relatively very low casualty figures by NATO, yet both sides are reported to have manpower shortages.

[oldtimer]

George Kennan in 1998 as someone in the Putin camp

...

Yes, of course, Putin decided to annex Ukraine (the place that is not really a country and was part of Rus back in the Middle Ages), because of NATO expansion. Garbage. I wonder what Kennan would say now. All we have now is that fossil Kissinger, and his schtick is as a PRC symp, so he's busy.

I believe their problem was having only Poland in, but not Russia in.

America invited both Greece and Turkey in NATO at the same time, because it knew that inviting only one guaranteed war with the other.

Same reason for having Britain, France, and Germany on the same team.

So inviting only Poland in NATO, meant war with Russia down the line.

Russia wanted to join NATO?  Anyway, the idea that Putin went wild because Poland was in NATO is equally incredible.

It's a matter of long-term foreign policy.

If 2 sides are inevitably going to go into conflict and you don't want to get drawn into it, you either stay away or invite both in to play referee.

In the case of Greece and Turkey : Cyprus and the Aegean.
In the case of Poland and Russia : Eastern Europe.

So if America wanted to avoid getting into a war it had to choose between inviting none or both.

In 1998 it was perfectly possible to invite both.
 
Now Poland will always veto, and there will always be conflict between Russia and Poland over Eastern Europe, which will drag NATO and the EU in even if it's other members don't want to.

Poland covets Russian territory, and a bunch of Russians living in an expanded Poland? Who knew?

It's called "sphere of influence",  not necessary direct territorial control.

[oldtimer]

More on Russian labor issues:

Russia is resorting to desperate measures to recruit soldiers

Trickery and coercion are the Kremlin’s methods

https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/08/01/russia-is-resorting-to-desperate-measures-to-recruit-soldiers

Putin is getting desperate. I copy and paste the final paragraph:

“One limiting factor in the mobilisation is the number of training centres. Even more acute is the shortage of officers. This is why the Kremlin raised the age of former professionals who can be called up to the age of 65. Pavel Luzin, a visiting scholar at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, says that “they are combing through the last Soviet generation.”

Potential cannon fodder of Russia:

Lek! Leka!

That's what I find weird in this War.

Both sides are estimated to have relatively very low casualty figures by NATO, yet both sides are reported to have manpower shortages.

Modern warfare is a lot more equipment and firepower intensive than earlier wars like WW2. So the casualties are numerically low compared to WW2, but each individual casualty and piece of equipment lost has a greater effect on capabilities.

As for difficulties with recruitment and training, the reason why Russia can't train recruits well is first of all that he Russian army does not have NCOs, and secondly is that most of the experienced people who could have trained new recruits were either already killed in Ukraine early on when Russia was trying to take Kyiv and Odesa etc, or are needed fighting in Ukraine. In addition to not having NCOs, Russia has lost a lot of officers needed for training and organization because Ukraine has effectively targeted them with drones, HIMARS, etc.

Difficulties with outright manpower for the army, on the other hand, are political. There are plenty of Russian males of military age that could be conscripted, but Putin is reluctant to forcibly mobilize too many. And in particular, he is reluctant to forcibly mobilize ethnic Russians, in particular ones from major urban areas like Moscow and St. Petersburg, because Putin is afraid of political unrest (especially in Moscow). While there are plenty of ethnic Russians left, the tap of prime military age males has started to go dry on Buryats, Avars, Tatars, and other ethnic minorities which Putin considers more expendable, and whose families do not live in places from which they could effectively organize meaningful protests or uprisings.

How about people falsifying the paperwork ?

Examples:

During Vietman american soldiers falsified documents all the time to get promoted, and during the Soviet Union the one single product produced tended to go from warehouse to warehouse to be counted as multiple products to boost production figures.

[oldtimer]

If multiple did yes but i won’t read into the CNN one in of itself

In the long-term a change in opinion like that isn't good but I doubt it would affect plans for more aid this year. I would be more worried about 2024, although I would hope an end to the war is at least within sight a year from now.

Well the conditions for the end of the war are are now purely political involving a change of leadership in America or Russia:

I don't think that the Biden Administration will drop it's demand for Ukraine to join NATO if hostilities end, so Russia will still fight.

I don't think Russia can win the war with Putin as it's leader, so Ukraine will still fight.

There also can be no negotiations as long as Putin is in charge, because it would be politically unacceptable to the West.

Unless Zelenski marches to Moscow and topples Putin of course.

[oldtimer]

IReality is that Ukraine is not getting anything major back through military means. That door closed the moment Russia signed it's partial mobilization.

Reality is that the (Vietnamese/Afghans) are not going to take control of the whole of their country's territory from the (Americans/Soviets). That door closed the moment a superpower decided to commit to large scale troop deployments and send large numbers of conscripts to fight, showing a real permanent commitment to the war effort.

I mean imagine it, the Vietnamese/Afghans beating the Americans/Soviets. LOL!!! Never gonna happen. They had better sue for peace on whatever terms the superpower deigns to offer to them.

Dude it’s the Russian military! They have endless manpower which is why they win every war they are in. Expect for the Russo-Japanese war, WW1, the Polish-Soviet war, the Vlora incident, Afghanistan twice (little known 1929 intervention and the more well known 1980’s one), and the first Chechen war. Actually now thinking about it Russia has a sh*tty modern military history despite its size and manpower

To this we can add that in the WWII the Nazis were one step away from capturing Moscow, but thanks to the help of the West in volumes that modern Ukraine cannot even dream of, Moscow managed to start winning after two years of defeats.

This is probably too dismissive towards the Red Army, though it's true that the West's aid was quite important for Soviets to make it.
The Red Army was hugely successful in cosigning the Kwantung Army to the dustbin of history...

Russia has never won a war on it's own, except the 1877 Russo-Turkish War.

Even the defeat of Napoleon was funded by Britain.

It's due to cultural issues.
Like Germans being aggressive, organising, and obedient.

Most Russian Tsars where German, but their subjects where definitely not, so Russia has always been a disorganised mess of a country.

I'm quite certain that if Hitler had been more lenient towards slavs and jews, he would have won WW2, because the entire Soviet Population would have preferred him over Stalin.

[oldtimer]

I thought the counteroffensive was a major success though? What are they complaining about then? How did endless billions and billions of dollars got all spent in a shovel and airplane advertising like the cartoon mocks? Where did all that money go to, then?

Funny how the narrative changes so absurdly quickly when not backed by reality. This conflict will stay as looooong stand-off and anyone who acts this is being solved this year or the next is just lying to others and maybe even to themselves.

It isn't.

I gave it 2 months+ for the benefit of the doubt, I think it was doomed the moment they did a "russian" and attacked the enemy strongpoints head-on and with tanks.

It's so stupid, only russians had done it in glorious failure last year, even in Bakhmut they needed 10 months to capture it, and for some reason they feel the need to copy that glorious failure.

It's like the ukrainian army forgotten all the lessons of 21st century warfare that they applied in 2022, I wonder if western training has been a detriment.
 

[oldtimer]

New US military aid package just dropped

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3491937/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/

That probably tells you what they are currently spending on the battlefield.

[oldtimer]

But the squiggly line for the British Pound will eventually go back up as long as the Bank of England and Westminster policymaking is stable and transparent. With the Russian Ruble, its squiggly line only goes down, and has been the case for decades. Only doing less worse than the Turkish Lira and the Argentine Peso isn't something to be proud of.

In any case, the Russian Central Bank has been hiking its rates to restrain the slide of the Ruble, far more aggressively than any western central bank. And the Ruble is still falling, but less quickly than in the absence of these rate hikes. All this was supposed to be over in three days.

What is this obsession of some with finance during warfare ?

The things that matter in a war are men and guns, not financial statistics sheets.

When Russia was losing badly the only thing peddled by some pro-russians was useless statistics.

I consider it bad news for Ukraine when it's side does the same.

[oldtimer]

http://www.1prime.biz/news/_Putin_Russian_budget_to_have_surplus_in_July%E2%80%93September/0/%7B57389966-A52D-4107-BBFD-F2A09C3EBC8F%7D.uif

"Putin: Russian budget to have surplus in July–September"

Putin claims Russia will run a budget surplus in q3 2023 and keep the 2023 budget deficit at the planned 2% vs something like 3.3% that most outside expects. I am skeptical but Purin will have a lot more inside information to make thia claim. 

This reminds me of when the British Government charged it's soldiers for each bullet they fired to balance the budget during the American Revolution.

That's how wars can be lost.

Also tells you the priority of Putin is cheapskate economising instead of military procurements.

[oldtimer]

Prigozhin was an idiot for stopping his coup when he did. You can't try to coup, stop and not have something like this happen.

Only idiots trust Putin.

If you have to kill Putin to survive, kill him first ask questions later.

[oldtimer]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/22/ukraines-army-is-running-out-of-men-to-recruit/

"Ukraine’s army is running out of men to recruit, and time to win"
"Victory may be in sight for Vladimir Putin"

Putin busy murdering his best people after Victory ?

Stalin did the same thing when he no longer needed them.

So will Jaichind and Woody be next on the liquidation list ?

Will they defect to the West before Putin murders them too ?

[oldtimer]

Either Ukraine has such a good intelligence network inside Russia they placed a bomb on Prigozhin's personal plane at an airport in Moscow without getting noticed/caught or Putin (probably the FSB, specifically) did it. I know which one I'd bet did it:

https://twitter.com/Faytuks/status/1694403110892916744?s=20

You know America should offer all those russians an opportunity to defect before they are murdered by Putin.

They all know that they will probably be next at some point when their services are no longer needed by the "great dictator".

Make the war against Putin instead of Russia, and they will all switch to your side.

[oldtimer]

Not a surprise.  Putin does not sound like someone you can betray without paying a price.  In this case the ultimate price. 

Putin doesn't even reward those who do a good job, he purges them.

Which means you, Jaichind, might be next.

You should probably defect :

[oldtimer]

Since Prigozhin wanted Shoigu out I wouldn't be surprised if Shoigu gave the Authority to shut down the plane.

Something like that in a Dictatorship doesn't happen unless the Dictator gives the direct order.

Though there is the assasination of Fritz Todt by Goering in 1942, but that was a bomb not the direct use of the military.