...that were easily opened and not within clear view of the general public.TopBadger wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 3:24 pmI can only guess that his house didn't have any windows...EACLucifer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 2:17 pmDimitry Zelenov, a Russian oligarch living in France, has died after falling down the stairs. He was fifty. One does wonder about the nature of this fall.
The Invasion of Ukraine
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
If I were an oligarch I'd be shopping for bungalow.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1 ... K5xCNeHwwwMoldova's security service chief Alexandru Musteata warns of a "very high risk" of a Russian offensive towards Transnistria
With what?
- EACLucifer
- Stummy Beige
- Posts: 4177
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
- Location: In Sumerian Haze
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
And how do they get there? The existing occupation force is wholly inadequate.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 5:56 amhttps://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1 ... K5xCNeHwwwMoldova's security service chief Alexandru Musteata warns of a "very high risk" of a Russian offensive towards Transnistria
With what?
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
And isn't Transnistria a Russian-backed breakaway region within Moldova? Why would the Russians attack Transnistria?EACLucifer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 7:29 amAnd how do they get there? The existing occupation force is wholly inadequate.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 5:56 amhttps://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1 ... K5xCNeHwwwMoldova's security service chief Alexandru Musteata warns of a "very high risk" of a Russian offensive towards Transnistria
With what?
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"
- EACLucifer
- Stummy Beige
- Posts: 4177
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
- Location: In Sumerian Haze
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
It's a Russian occupied piece of Moldova, and it has been since the fall of the USSR. And the threat isn't that they'd attack it, the threat, in theory, is that they'd link up with their occupation troops there.Martin_B wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 9:07 amAnd isn't Transnistria a Russian-backed breakaway region within Moldova? Why would the Russians attack Transnistria?EACLucifer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 7:29 amAnd how do they get there? The existing occupation force is wholly inadequate.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 5:56 am
https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1 ... K5xCNeHwww
With what?
However, they don't have very many occupation troops there, and getting more troops there would mean overflying Ukraine or landing at Odesa...neither of which is happening.
- EACLucifer
- Stummy Beige
- Posts: 4177
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
- Location: In Sumerian Haze
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Zelenskyy visited Bakhmut, which has been under Russian attack for many months now and is site of some of the worst fighting, today. That takes courage. No matter how good his security, that takes courage.
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Courage, yes, and also confidence that no one would leak his location in advance.EACLucifer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 6:37 pmZelenskyy visited Bakhmut, which has been under Russian attack for many months now and is site of some of the worst fighting, today. That takes courage. No matter how good his security, that takes courage.
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Won't see Putin there anytime soon...
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html
- EACLucifer
- Stummy Beige
- Posts: 4177
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
- Location: In Sumerian Haze
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Yes. Meanwhile, reportedly during the early phase of the war, when Russian senior officers were dropping like flies, some Russians were allegedly selling location information to the Americans.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 8:11 pmCourage, yes, and also confidence that no one would leak his location in advance.EACLucifer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 6:37 pmZelenskyy visited Bakhmut, which has been under Russian attack for many months now and is site of some of the worst fighting, today. That takes courage. No matter how good his security, that takes courage.
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
One wonders how any Russian troops get to and from Transnistria even before the present war, given all 3 airports in Transnistria are non-operational, and you can't imagine Russian troops transiting either Ukraine or Moldova. Maybe they are flown in and out surreptitiously from ships by helicopter, or making informal use of one of these apparently disused strips. Tiraspol Airport was somewhat mysteriously attacked earlier this year, seemingly by drones, along with some other Transnistrian targets. I guess both Ukraine and Moldova would have a joint interest in putting Tiraspol Airport and the Russian garrison there rather more completely out of action.
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
How the algorithm tipped the balance in Ukraine
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... raine-war/
Free version
https://web.archive.org/web/20221220064 ... raine-war/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... raine-war/
Free version
https://web.archive.org/web/20221220064 ... raine-war/
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
That’s reads like a PR release from Palantir, nowhere does it actually say the UKR forces are actually using it. From my understanding the software in use by the Ukrainians is homebrew software to do the integrated data acquisition and intelligence coordination to manage the battlefield. It’s not as if UKR lacks talented software folk.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... field-edge
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... field-edge
- bob sterman
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1143
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
- Location: Location Location
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Indeed - very much like a press release - and the nuclear analogy provided by the Planatir CEO Alex Harp is perhaps the most appalling example of tech-bro hype I've seen.bjn wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 6:23 amThat’s reads like a PR release from Palantir, nowhere does it actually say the UKR forces are actually using it. From my understanding the software in use by the Ukrainians is homebrew software to do the integrated data acquisition and intelligence coordination to manage the battlefield. It’s not as if UKR lacks talented software folk.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... field-edge
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
More on European production problems:
I keep posting this stuff because the longer the war goes on the more the relative importance of production compared to other factors.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/europe-is- ... 1671707775“Governments have been slashing contracts for decades, so companies shed production lines and employees,” said Mr. Lange, a senior fellow with the Munich Security Conference, a global security forum.
The current shortage of shells and missiles is largely due to a shift in the military doctrines of NATO allies in recent decades: Instead of planning for World War II-style ground battles, they focused on targeted, asymmetric warfare against unsophisticated opponents, said Morten Brandtzæg, chief executive of Nammo AS, one of the world’s largest arms manufacturers.
“We need orders of magnitude more industrial capacity,” said Mr. Brandtzæg, whose company is co-owned by the governments of Norway and Finland.
Ukraine uses up to 40,000 artillery shells of the NATO caliber 155mm each month, while the entire annual production of such projectiles in Europe is around 300,000, according to Michal Strnad, owner of Czechoslovak Group AS, a Czech company that produces around 30% of Europe’s output of such munitions.
“European production capacity is grossly inadequate,” Mr. Strnad said. Even if the war were to stop overnight, Europe would need up to 15 years to resupply its stocks at current production rates, he said.
British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said in an interview with U.K. media that an extra 500 million to 600 million pounds, roughly equivalent to $604 million to $725 million, had been added to the British budget to start replenishing ammunition stocks. French President Emmanuel Macron said earlier this year that the war meant that France needed to increase its military capacity and manufacturing speed. In a recent speech, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said “we have made the wrong decisions in the last decades when it comes to ammunition supply.”
At present, Germany doesn’t have enough ammunition to last more than two weeks in case of a Russian attack, German officials said, falling well short of NATO requirements that members should stock enough ammunition for at least 30 days of combat.
This is because, despite being one of the top five arms exporters globally, Germany doesn’t have a large-scale armaments industry, said Wolfgang Schmidt, chief of staff to Mr. Scholz.
The country’s once mass-scale manufacturing has now been reduced to a high-end workshop with small capacity, Mr. Schmidt said.
Germany needs to invest 20 billion euros, or about $21.2 billion, just to meet NATO’s 30-day ammunition requirements, Mr. Schmidt said. However, Defense Ministry officials said that the current budget only envisages just over €1 billion for ammunition in 2023.
One obstacle to rapid rearmament is recent European Union legislation that declared weapons manufacturing not sustainable, cutting it off from some private funding, said Hans Christoph Atzpodien, head of the German defense-industry association.
Some efforts are being made to expand production across Europe. Germany will co-finance the refurbishment and expansion of a Soviet-era factory in Romania to produce both NATO-standard shells and types compatible with Soviet-standard weapons used by Ukraine, according to German and Romanian officials. The project, which hasn’t been previously reported, could be unveiled by the end of this month.
Companies are boosting production too, sometimes anticipating government orders. Nammo, the Norwegian conglomerate, is working to deliver 10 times its normal artillery shell output, according to its chief, Mr. Brandtzæg. The Czechoslovak Group will in 2023 double its output of 155mm shells to 100,000, its owner Mr. Strnad said. BAE Systems PLC recently signed a £2.4 billion contract to supply the U.K.’s Ministry of Defense with ammunition.
Germany’s Rheinmetall AG made a €1.2 billion bid for the Spanish ammunition maker Expal Systems SA; the acquisition, if approved by antitrust authorities, will help Rheinmetall boost production, the company said. It will also build a new production line to make 35mm shells for the Gepard air-defense systems that Germany donated to Ukraine.
“The best way Europe can support Ukraine is to increase production of artillery shells now—this will be the single biggest issue next year,” said Rob Lee, a senior fellow with the Foreign Policy Research Institute, a U.S. think tank.
I keep posting this stuff because the longer the war goes on the more the relative importance of production compared to other factors.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
A bit more on how the US's support for Ukraine serves a wider geopolitical agenda, directly from the horses' mouths:
Obviously Zelensky and Biden are tankie scum who should f.ck off to Russia since they love it so much, etc etc.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64057847Throughout their joint press conference, Mr Biden and Mr Zelensky tried to characterise American aid as serving a larger purpose. The American president described Russia's attack on Ukraine as an attack on "liberty and democracy and the core principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity" - one that demanded a robust American response.
Mr Zelensky, for his part, mixed gravitas and humour as he spoke with Mr Biden and to the American people. Occasionally switching into serviceable English to accentuate the connection with his audience, he called the US aid to Ukraine an "investment" that will strengthen global security.
It was an interesting choice of words - and one he repeated in his address to Congress. American aid was not "charity", but money spent with a purpose and a potential for future return.
Obviously Zelensky and Biden are tankie scum who should f.ck off to Russia since they love it so much, etc etc.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
The prevailing narrative since the early days of the invasion has been that Russia will run out of equipment imminently. Surely there's little risk of the west running out first?Woodchopper wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 4:45 pm
I keep posting this stuff because the longer the war goes on the more the relative importance of production compared to other factors.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
I actually read something about this the other week that argued the USA was holding back weapons for a hypothetical clash with Russia instead of sending them to the conflict that's actually taking place: https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/09/mi ... shortages/
Staff Gen. Mark Milley, is required to regularly submit munitions requirements to Congress for each war plan on the agency’s books, known in Pentagon parlance as operational plans (or OPLANs). Most of the munitions that the United States is giving to Ukraine—such as NATO-standard 155mm artillery and multiple launch rockets, for instance—are earmarked for fighting Russia or North Korea.
But the lack of changes to the plans since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February has frustrated lawmakers and aides, who have called for more of the weapons put aside for a hypothetical fight with Russia to be sent to Ukraine, which is actually fighting Russia now. As the pace of U.S. military aid to Ukraine has slipped since the summer, concern on Capitol Hill is that the United States is holding back weapons for a Europe-wide conflict that Russia may not be prepared to fight, when Ukrainian troops are already degrading the Russian military on the battlefield.
“The OPLAN versus Russia is the same one it’s been for the last decade,” said a second congressional aide familiar with the debate, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes discussions. “We haven’t adjusted that based on the fact that the Ukrainians have essentially neutered the Russian army. So we have a plan in place to deal with the Russian army as we thought it was a year or two years ago.”
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
I think that some of the assumptions about Russia running out were optimistic. For example about a month ago I posted assessments that Russia still has thousands of tanks. Certainly many may not be in good shape, but Russia will probably be able to get them working faster than than others can build new ones.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 7:43 pmThe prevailing narrative since the early days of the invasion has been that Russia will run out of equipment imminently. Surely there's little risk of the west running out first?Woodchopper wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 4:45 pm
I keep posting this stuff because the longer the war goes on the more the relative importance of production compared to other factors.
I don’t think any side will actually run out. They’ll reduce the intensity of fighting instead. The danger is stagnation. If both Russia and Ukraine lack the material needed to attack then the front lines may become much more fixed. Defence is much easier and needs less.
Such a situation would benefit Russia more than Ukraine. It has Ukrainian territory and sitting immobile will suit the Kremlin.
I’m also concerned about the long term commitment from Ukraine’s supporters. It’s probably going to be harder to persuade the electorates to keep sending military aid for years when there are severe problems at home.
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
The US is holding back supplies that are earmarked in contingency plans for other possible wars.jdc wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 8:39 pmI actually read something about this the other week that argued the USA was holding back weapons for a hypothetical clash with Russia instead of sending them to the conflict that's actually taking place: https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/09/mi ... shortages/
Staff Gen. Mark Milley, is required to regularly submit munitions requirements to Congress for each war plan on the agency’s books, known in Pentagon parlance as operational plans (or OPLANs). Most of the munitions that the United States is giving to Ukraine—such as NATO-standard 155mm artillery and multiple launch rockets, for instance—are earmarked for fighting Russia or North Korea.
But the lack of changes to the plans since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February has frustrated lawmakers and aides, who have called for more of the weapons put aside for a hypothetical fight with Russia to be sent to Ukraine, which is actually fighting Russia now. As the pace of U.S. military aid to Ukraine has slipped since the summer, concern on Capitol Hill is that the United States is holding back weapons for a Europe-wide conflict that Russia may not be prepared to fight, when Ukrainian troops are already degrading the Russian military on the battlefield.
“The OPLAN versus Russia is the same one it’s been for the last decade,” said a second congressional aide familiar with the debate, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes discussions. “We haven’t adjusted that based on the fact that the Ukrainians have essentially neutered the Russian army. So we have a plan in place to deal with the Russian army as we thought it was a year or two years ago.”
Certainly the US Department of Defense appears to be overly rigid. But there is a valid point. If it’s going to take, say, five years to replenish stocks then it’s reasonable to assume that during that period there may be a war somewhere involving the US.
For example, no one would have predicted in 2010 that within five years the US would be sending billions of dollars worth of arms to equip a Kurdish army fighting against genocidal Islamic extremists who had taken over much of Iraq and Syria.
The US isn’t going to send all its stocks of arms unless it can be certain that they won’t be needed elsewhere.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
That makes sense. I wonder if fixed front lines might lend themselves better to the kind of strategic high-tech stuff the west is more prepared for?Woodchopper wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 8:39 pmI think that some of the assumptions about Russia running out were optimistic. For example about a month ago I posted assessments that Russia still has thousands of tanks. Certainly many may not be in good shape, but Russia will probably be able to get them working faster than than others can build new ones.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 7:43 pmThe prevailing narrative since the early days of the invasion has been that Russia will run out of equipment imminently. Surely there's little risk of the west running out first?Woodchopper wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 4:45 pm
I keep posting this stuff because the longer the war goes on the more the relative importance of production compared to other factors.
I don’t think any side will actually run out. They’ll reduce the intensity of fighting instead. The danger is stagnation. If both Russia and Ukraine lack the material needed to attack then the front lines may become much more fixed. Defence is much easier and needs less.
Such a situation would benefit Russia more than Ukraine. It has Ukrainian territory and sitting immobile will suit the Kremlin.
I’m also concerned about the long term commitment from Ukraine’s supporters. It’s probably going to be harder to persuade the electorates to keep sending military aid for years when there are severe problems at home.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Can’t remember where I read it in the last few days, but I have seen reports that the intensity Russian of artillery fires in the Bakhmut offensive has slackened which was put down to shortage of shells.
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Russia plans to increase the size of its army by up to 50%.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-to-b ... 1671648449
MOSCOW—President Vladimir Putin approved an increase in Russia’s military manpower while ordering the enhancement of its potential and capability, suggesting that the Kremlin is digging in for a protracted war effort.
Mr. Putin pledged to give unlimited funding to the armed forces for equipment and hardware to fulfill Moscow’s military campaign in Ukraine and ordered his commanders to supply more improved weaponry to troops, upgrade communications and modernize military draft offices.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu proposed an increase in the number of service personnel from the current level of around 1 million to 1.5 million, including 695,000 contract soldiers.
In the Great Patriotic War (WW2 to 'muricans), Soviets retreated to Moscow and Leningrad, and then re-grouped and re-equipped to take the battle to the Nazis. I can see the same scenario playing out here.Mr. Shoigu also said that Russia is planning to create new air formations, including eight bomber aviation regiments and a fighter aviation regiment. Three new motorized rifle divisions, including in the occupied Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia that Russia recently claimed, will also be created, Mr. Shoigu said. Additionally, an army corps will be formed in Karelia, in northwest Russia bordering Finland, while seven motorized rifle brigades will be enlarged to become divisions, he said.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-to-b ... 1671648449
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is suggesting the US sends all its stocks of arms - I was under the impression that each plan had its own stockpile and that using the Russia stockpile to send arms to Ukraine in their fight against Russia wouldn't affect the US stockpiles and planning for other potential wars. They're using arms earmarked for fighting North Korea or Russia and people are just suggesting they use a few more of those that were earmarked for Russia, no?Woodchopper wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 8:49 pmThe US is holding back supplies that are earmarked in contingency plans for other possible wars.jdc wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 8:39 pmI actually read something about this the other week that argued the USA was holding back weapons for a hypothetical clash with Russia instead of sending them to the conflict that's actually taking place: https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/09/mi ... shortages/
Staff Gen. Mark Milley, is required to regularly submit munitions requirements to Congress for each war plan on the agency’s books, known in Pentagon parlance as operational plans (or OPLANs). Most of the munitions that the United States is giving to Ukraine—such as NATO-standard 155mm artillery and multiple launch rockets, for instance—are earmarked for fighting Russia or North Korea.
But the lack of changes to the plans since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February has frustrated lawmakers and aides, who have called for more of the weapons put aside for a hypothetical fight with Russia to be sent to Ukraine, which is actually fighting Russia now. As the pace of U.S. military aid to Ukraine has slipped since the summer, concern on Capitol Hill is that the United States is holding back weapons for a Europe-wide conflict that Russia may not be prepared to fight, when Ukrainian troops are already degrading the Russian military on the battlefield.
“The OPLAN versus Russia is the same one it’s been for the last decade,” said a second congressional aide familiar with the debate, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes discussions. “We haven’t adjusted that based on the fact that the Ukrainians have essentially neutered the Russian army. So we have a plan in place to deal with the Russian army as we thought it was a year or two years ago.”
Certainly the US Department of Defense appears to be overly rigid. But there is a valid point. If it’s going to take, say, five years to replenish stocks then it’s reasonable to assume that during that period there may be a war somewhere involving the US.
For example, no one would have predicted in 2010 that within five years the US would be sending billions of dollars worth of arms to equip a Kurdish army fighting against genocidal Islamic extremists who had taken over much of Iraq and Syria.
The US isn’t going to send all its stocks of arms unless it can be certain that they won’t be needed elsewhere.
Re: The Invasion of Ukraine
Great! If the Russians retreat from all Ukrainian land, in order the re-group and re-equip, then Ukraine can get its stolen land back and start defending its borders. That's what the Ukrainians want. (Well, they'd rather not have to defend the borders, but getting the land back is what's important here!)Herainestold wrote: ↑Thu Dec 22, 2022 10:06 pmRussia plans to increase the size of its army by up to 50%.
MOSCOW—President Vladimir Putin approved an increase in Russia’s military manpower while ordering the enhancement of its potential and capability, suggesting that the Kremlin is digging in for a protracted war effort.
Mr. Putin pledged to give unlimited funding to the armed forces for equipment and hardware to fulfill Moscow’s military campaign in Ukraine and ordered his commanders to supply more improved weaponry to troops, upgrade communications and modernize military draft offices.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu proposed an increase in the number of service personnel from the current level of around 1 million to 1.5 million, including 695,000 contract soldiers.In the Great Patriotic War (WW2 to 'muricans), Soviets retreated to Moscow and Leningrad, and then re-grouped and re-equipped to take the battle to the Nazis. I can see the same scenario playing out here.Mr. Shoigu also said that Russia is planning to create new air formations, including eight bomber aviation regiments and a fighter aviation regiment. Three new motorized rifle divisions, including in the occupied Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia that Russia recently claimed, will also be created, Mr. Shoigu said. Additionally, an army corps will be formed in Karelia, in northwest Russia bordering Finland, while seven motorized rifle brigades will be enlarged to become divisions, he said.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-to-b ... 1671648449
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"