Thread: No more powder

Greetings All,
I had a quick poke around on the interweb this morning and quickly found plenty of posts on Forums parroting the discontinuance of the Enduron powders. One even forcasted the discontinuance of almost every powder I currently use. From IMR and Hodgdons nothing. IMR did warn of fake web sites offering the Hodgdon/ IMR powders no doubt at much higher prices. Sound familiar? When demand for any product exceeds supply a secondary (or black) market can develop. Once shortages in the market start to ease the scalpers will do anything to maintain their profits and I think that that is what is happening here including the fake websites and fake news on the forums. To me the idea that vast quantities of small arms powder are being sucked up in the Ukraine is not an issue. Even more must have been used in Afganistan and most battles have been fought with artillary and bombs (more recently missiles) since the latter part of WW1 so I don't think the idea holds water.
To me the whole powder shortage is a result of panic buying, aggravated by other events of the last 2 years and the rumours of Enduron discontinuance smells strongly of substances found in pastures recently vacated by gentleman cows. Time will tell.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
I had a quick poke around on the interweb this morning and quickly found plenty of posts on Forums parroting the discontinuance of the Enduron powders. One even forcasted the discontinuance of almost every powder I currently use. From IMR and Hodgdons nothing. IMR did warn of fake web sites offering the Hodgdon/ IMR powders no doubt at much higher prices. Sound familiar? When demand for any product exceeds supply a secondary (or black) market can develop. Once shortages in the market start to ease the scalpers will do anything to maintain their profits and I think that that is what is happening here including the fake websites and fake news on the forums. To me the idea that vast quantities of small arms powder are being sucked up in the Ukraine is not an issue. Even more must have been used in Afganistan and most battles have been fought with artillary and bombs (more recently missiles) since the latter part of WW1 so I don't think the idea holds water.
To me the whole powder shortage is a result of panic buying, aggravated by other events of the last 2 years and the rumours of Enduron discontinuance smells strongly of substances found in pastures recently vacated by gentleman cows. Time will tell.
Regards Grandpamac.

Reload Swiss (RS) makes a lot of powder for Alliant (Reloader 17,22 and 26 IIRC).

But yeah, it will take a while for things to flow downstream. The UK banned several ADI made powders (like Varget, Trail Boss and H4350) due to REACH.

You can still find the odd tub for sale, but people who are clinging onto a finite supply are getting increasingly desperate.

I hear a firstborn, kidney and some unspeakable things have been offered in exchange for an 8lb jug of Varget.

Originally Posted by caberslash

Attachment 205150

Reload Swiss (RS) makes a lot of powder for Alliant (Reloader 17,22 and 26 IIRC).

But yeah, it will take a while for things to flow downstream. The UK banned several ADI made powders (like Varget, Trail Boss and H4350) due to REACH.

You can still find the odd tub for sale, but people who are clinging onto a finite supply are getting increasingly desperate.

I hear a firstborn, kidney and some unspeakable things have been offered in exchange for an 8lb jug of Varget.

Greetings @caberslash,
It seems you have two events (at least) restricting supply in the UK and Europe but honestly could not agree with Nigel's last sentance. I don't think that either event applies to such an extent in other countries. Getting back to the Enduron powders I still have not seen any credible evidence to convince me that Enduron has been discontinued but will watch this space.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by caberslash

Attachment 205150

Reload Swiss (RS) makes a lot of powder for Alliant (Reloader 17,22 and 26 IIRC).

But yeah, it will take a while for things to flow downstream. The UK banned several ADI made powders (like Varget, Trail Boss and H4350) due to REACH.

You can still find the odd tub for sale, but people who are clinging onto a finite supply are getting increasingly desperate.

I hear a firstborn, kidney and some unspeakable things have been offered in exchange for an 8lb jug of Varget.

smells like War.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
I had a quick poke around on the interweb this morning and quickly found plenty of posts on Forums parroting the discontinuance of the Enduron powders. One even forcasted the discontinuance of almost every powder I currently use. From IMR and Hodgdons nothing. IMR did warn of fake web sites offering the Hodgdon/ IMR powders no doubt at much higher prices. Sound familiar? When demand for any product exceeds supply a secondary (or black) market can develop. Once shortages in the market start to ease the scalpers will do anything to maintain their profits and I think that that is what is happening here including the fake websites and fake news on the forums. To me the idea that vast quantities of small arms powder are being sucked up in the Ukraine is not an issue. Even more must have been used in Afganistan and most battles have been fought with artillary and bombs (more recently missiles) since the latter part of WW1 so I don't think the idea holds water.
To me the whole powder shortage is a result of panic buying, aggravated by other events of the last 2 years and the rumours of Enduron discontinuance smells strongly of substances found in pastures recently vacated by gentleman cows. Time will tell.
Regards Grandpamac.

What you have written makes a lot of sense but it may not actually be correct. The following link is for the Department of Defense contracts (per day)https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rc...FPSwDnuZ2CFWa9 Pick a day and see how much the contracts let for the day add up to. It doesn't need many of these contract to soak up all the propellant

ADI have stopped making pistol/shots he’ll powders for the time being.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They will probably be soaking up all plant capacity making the ball powder grades for .50, 20mm and 30mm cartridges. Consumption of those caliber components must be out through the roof in the EU and other places making ammo, the Russians must have damn near consumed all of their fresh stocks of shells by now and be working on the older Soviet-era fodder. By all accounts the Russian stock of artillery tubes is due to be expended by the end of the year - that's an interesting sideline proposition as what do they replace all of their heavy weaponry with after they've used it all uselessly pounding the Donbas region for no really positive results?

Propellant supplies for the heavier caliber weapons will be chewing through raw material production as well which won't be helping the downstream supplies of civilian powders.

Originally Posted by No.3

They will probably be soaking up all plant capacity making the ball powder grades for .50, 20mm and 30mm cartridges. Consumption of those caliber components must be out through the roof in the EU and other places making ammo, the Russians must have damn near consumed all of their fresh stocks of shells by now and be working on the older Soviet-era fodder. By all accounts the Russian stock of artillery tubes is due to be expended by the end of the year - that's an interesting sideline proposition as what do they replace all of their heavy weaponry with after they've used it all uselessly pounding the Donbas region for no really positive results?

Propellant supplies for the heavier caliber weapons will be chewing through raw material production as well which won't be helping the downstream supplies of civilian powders.

It makes you wonder if the Russians actually had a clear plan and objectives in starting the war in Ukraine. Perhaps the believed their own propaganda over the oppressed Ukrainians wanting a return to their earlier rulers. If they were expecting to be greeted as liberators they were largely mistaken. All the liberators recieved were graves, often unmarked. A very sad event for all concerned which just reinforced that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

It makes you wonder if the Russians actually had a clear plan and objectives in starting the war in Ukraine. Perhaps the believed their own propaganda over the oppressed Ukrainians wanting a return to their earlier rulers. If they were expecting to be greeted as liberators they were largely mistaken. All the liberators recieved were graves, often unmarked. A very sad event for all concerned which just reinforced that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Grandpamac.

The whole thing was a shambles from the get go - you don't send in units directly after a month of wargames that have left your supply lines stretched to capacity with shifting consumables up to replace what's been used, your vehicles needing maintenance to get on top of all the glitches a month of solid hard off road use shows up and that's not factoring in fatigue and wear and tear on your people. After the initial failure, the Russians were left with two options - go home as a laughing stock, or double down and remain a laughing stock but with much limited military capacity and a lifetime of shattered families and trauma to deal with (and financial costs). Unfortunately they chose the latter option, which is going to have ramifications around the planet for a long time to come.

Those outfits and countries who relied on Russian supplies of munitions and hardware are now up the creek and will be looking for other sources, and once they've changed suppliers so to speak it will be a hard road going back. 'Western' arms suppliers will be both rubbing their hands together and alternatively shitting bricks as to HOW they can meet supply requirements, as their own Govt purchasing setups will be looking to curtail exports in favour of their own needs and supply shortages. It's bloody interesting, one war in Europe and it does more for world civilian arms control than any number of idealist dreamer politicians and police boffins around the planet. It also likely does more to set the global climate change agenda back than any other one event (maybe discounting the Aussie bushfires and the Tonga eruption). I hear that the Russians are flaring incredible quantities of gas with the pipelines shut down - it's apparently incredibly difficult to seal the wellheads and stop production so they are a little stuffed with regard to shutting gas flow off. It's either shut it off which can dictate a period of months to restart production or flare it for no profit, or sell it. I'd suggest the current gamesmanship with the EU won't last in the face of those decisions but it will be a long game of 'who blinks first'.

Originally Posted by No.3

The whole thing was a shambles from the get go - you don't send in units directly after a month of wargames that have left your supply lines stretched to capacity with shifting consumables up to replace what's been used, your vehicles needing maintenance to get on top of all the glitches a month of solid hard off road use shows up and that's not factoring in fatigue and wear and tear on your people. After the initial failure, the Russians were left with two options - go home as a laughing stock, or double down and remain a laughing stock but with much limited military capacity and a lifetime of shattered families and trauma to deal with (and financial costs). Unfortunately they chose the latter option, which is going to have ramifications around the planet for a long time to come.

Those outfits and countries who relied on Russian supplies of munitions and hardware are now up the creek and will be looking for other sources, and once they've changed suppliers so to speak it will be a hard road going back. 'Western' arms suppliers will be both rubbing their hands together and alternatively shitting bricks as to HOW they can meet supply requirements, as their own Govt purchasing setups will be looking to curtail exports in favour of their own needs and supply shortages. It's bloody interesting, one war in Europe and it does more for world civilian arms control than any number of idealist dreamer politicians and police boffins around the planet. It also likely does more to set the global climate change agenda back than any other one event (maybe discounting the Aussie bushfires and the Tonga eruption). I hear that the Russians are flaring incredible quantities of gas with the pipelines shut down - it's apparently incredibly difficult to seal the wellheads and stop production so they are a little stuffed with regard to shutting gas flow off. It's either shut it off which can dictate a period of months to restart production or flare it for no profit, or sell it. I'd suggest the current gamesmanship with the EU won't last in the face of those decisions but it will be a long game of 'who blinks first'.

What a lot of rubbish regarding Russian aggression, unfortunately it is the commonly held view of the situation created by incorrect media releases.
The reason the Nordstream 1 is shut is because of maintenance and theift of gas by Ukraine. Biden will not allow the replacement Nordstream 2 to be commissioned although it is sitting there ready to go and full of Gas.

The truth of the situation is that Zelensky tore up the Ukraine - Russia friendship agreement and made plans to takeover Crimea by force. This was announced worldwide in 2021 !

Ukraine approves strategy to “recover” Crimea, threatening all-out war with Russia

Jason Melanovski
19 March 2021
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba announced this week that the country’s National Security and Defense Council had approved a strategy that is aimed at retaking Crimea and reintegrating the strategically important peninsula.

Crimea, a peninsula in the Black Sea, was annexed by Russia in March 2014, following a US-backed, far-right coup in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine.

Announcing the move on Twitter, Kuleba wrote, “The signal is clear: we don’t just call on the world to help us return Crimea, Ukraine makes its own dedicated and systemic efforts under President [Volodymyr] Zelensky’s leadership.”

As part of its “3 pillars” strategy for retaking Ukraine, Kuleba notably stated that Zelensky’s administration sought “full Ukrainian sovereignty” over not just Crimea but that of the port city of Sevastopol as well, which serves as the home of the Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet.

Following Kuleba’s comments, Ukrainian President Zelensky announced via Twitter the creation of a Crimean Platform Initiative which the Ukrainian government described as “a new consultative and coordination format initiated by Ukraine to improve the efficiency of the international response to the occupation of Crimea, respond to growing security challenges, step up international pressure on Russia, prevent further human rights violations, protect victims of the occupying power and to achieve the de-occupation of Crimea and its return to Ukraine.”

The first summit of the newly created group is planned to take place in August and Zelensky reported having already spoken with the EU, Canada the United Kingdom and Turkey regarding the group’s creation.

Following the Stalinist dissolution of the Soviet Union, the port of Sevastopol had been leased to Russia by several successive Ukrainian governments. Its potential loss following the US-backed ousting of the President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 was widely seen as one of the primary motivators in Russia annexing the militarily strategic peninsula.

As Kuleba and Kiev are well aware, any attempt to impose its “full sovereignty” over one of the Russian Navy’s most important warm water ports on the Black Sea would result in a full-scale war that threatens the outbreak of a third world war.

On Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova denounced Kuleba’s and Zelensky’s comments as a thinly veiled threat of war over Crimea.

“All efforts by Kiev to reclaim Crimea are illegitimate and cannot be interpreted in any other way but a threat of aggression against two Russian [federal] subjects. We reiterate that we will consider participation of any states or organizations in such activities, including the Crimean Platform initiative, as a hostile act against Russia and direct encroachment on its territorial integrity," Zakharova said.

Kiev’s escalation of the conflict with Russia over Crimea comes under conditions where the country remains mired in a civil war in eastern Ukraine that has now lasted for almost seven years. The war has claimed the lives of over 14,000 people, displaced 1.4 million and left 3.5 million in need of humanitarian assistance. UNICEF recently noted that millions in the war zone still lack access to clean drinking water and some don’t have regular access to any water, even as COVID-19 cases are again rising sharply across the country.

The move of the Ukrainian government follows a series of anti-Russian political crackdowns and military buildups that have exacerbated the threat of a full-scale war. In February, the Zelensky government undemocratically shut down three popular television stations run by pro-Moscow opposition leader and oligarch Viktor Medvedchuk, on the grounds of “national security.” Medvedchuk was later sanctioned and Kiev has continued to charge opposition politicians and reporters with “treason” for backing a negotiated settlement with Moscow over the separatist-controlled regions of eastern Ukraine.

The crackdown was predictably condemned by the Kremlin, which argued that it demonstrated that Kiev was attempting “to solve the problem of [Donbass in Eastern Ukraine] by force.”

International monitors in eastern Ukraine have also recently reported a rapid increase in the number of ceasefire violations by both Ukrainian soldiers and Russian-backed separatists. This year, already 10 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed.

While Zelensky was initially elected in 2019 on the basis of a rejection of the far-right militaristic nationalism espoused by his predecessor Petro Poroshenko, Zelensky is now adopting a potentially even more reckless strategy. Much indicates that he is being supported in this by the United States.

Last week, an op-ed in the Washington Post suggested that Zelensky is desperate to receive a phone call from US President Joe Biden but is yet to receive one. The op-ed backed Zelensky’s recent political crackdowns and urged him to move even more aggressively against Russia.

“Mr. Zelensky now has the opportunity to forge a partnership with Mr. Biden that could decisively advance Ukraine’s attempt to break free from Russia and join the democratic West. He should seize on it,” the paper’s editorial board urged.

Speaking to Politico, a former US official close to the Biden administration was quoted as saying, “There is merit to having Zelensky sit and wait his turn for a call. He is not struggling with all his might to fight corruption. In fact, pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine have gained immense power since Zelensky took over. So there needs to be tough love with Zelensky when that one-on-one conversation does happen.”

Ukraine is highly dependent on military aid and backing from the US in its confrontation with Russia. On Monday, the Pentagon announced a $125 million military aid package for Ukraine, the first distribution of aid to Ukraine under the Biden administration.

There is still $150 million left in the allocated 2021 Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative funding appropriated by Congress. However, this money will not be released until the Defense and State departments jointly certify that there has been “sufficient progress” made by Kiev on “military reform” efforts.

While Biden has yet to speak with Zelensky, on the seventh anniversary of Russia’s annexation of Crimea the White House released a statement backing Ukraine in the dispute, stating, “The United States does not and will never recognize Russia’s purported annexation of the peninsula and we will stand with Ukraine against Russia’s aggressive acts.”

In its reckless military escalation, the Zelensky government is also driven by a deep social and political crisis in Ukraine itself. Its political support has fallen sharply as the country’s economy and health care system have been devastated by COVID-19, with no significant vaccination effort in sight. There is a real danger that the Ukrainian ruling class, driven by a deepening domestic crisis, is trying to divert these internal tensions outward, resulting in a war that would threaten the lives of millions.

During the Covid pandemic the US has been stocking Ukraine with arms in preparation for the assault on Crimea.

A further link regarding Bidens sanctions against the Nordstream 2 pipeline introduced in 2021 ( that is the year before the war started )
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/20...ns-on-russians

Here's what you're looking for Moa Hunter



Personally I prefer this one

As @No.3 has indicated, sporting people possibly have little comprehension just how much propellant is being consumed daily around the world now...esp in Eastern Europe. And they will pay handsomely for it. One sporting hand loader could reload for a decade with the volume of powder a single 155 ER round represents.

And just because an order for propellant/ammo is for a Defence Force does not mean it will be fulfilled any time soon. I would bet ours is quietly shitting itself just how low stocks will be getting.

Oops. My apologies. This thread has gone a bit feral. Not my intention.
Regards Grandpamac

Ahhhhh - not actually taking sides on the entire Russian/Ukrainian family squabble thing, bit off topic but here we go anyway...

I wasn't intending to comment on Russian aggression just the apparent stupidity behind the strategic and tactical factors by which they reached the decision to lauch a large-scale invasion at that time. It might not have started out as a decision to mount a large scale invasion, but equally after the initial failures Russia could have made a more sane decision to stick their tail between their legs and sod off home rather than doubling down and proceeding to shower the landscape in blood. Standard military doctrine states that Russia by keeping it a 'special military operation' has tied themselves to an eventual failure simply due to attrition and not being able to field sufficient manpower to maintain control over the battlefield (Russian law prevents large-scale military and industrial mobilisation without a declaration of war - and in any event the effects of the sanctions in limiting access to technology probably prevents much of a ramp-up in industrial capacity now anyway). It does have the effect of making light nuclear weapon use somewhat more likely too. In the same vein, Ukrainian mobilisation is probably too slow to reach a critical level of troops to efficiently and effectively force the Russian units back out of contested lands - leading to 'stalemate' which has been much bandied about and misused by the media. Ukrainian use of more modern tech weapons has only really levelled the playing field and not resulted in a shift in the balance - this is another factor tying Russia down further into a war of attrition.

Any way you look at it, this is more costly than any engagement since WW2 with a faster casualty rate in manpower, equipment and munitions than just about every action Russia has been involved in in the last 30 years combined. The stats don't lie, and against things going forwards - winter is coming. All that happens in that part of the world in winter in terms of warfare is people dying - bad juju's.

Talking further about the reasons behind the entire thing - Crimea houses the home port of the Black Sea fleet. Nuf said - without own-country control of that base tensions were always going to occur as soon as the host nation tried to extract more for the favour of housing the fleet. If you look at the bridge between Russia and Crimea - and particularly the speed at which the bridge was built after 2014 there was a large amount of the preplanning gone into that design prior to 2014 and the eventual annexation. Unfortunately the bridge is only good for light vehicles, so a land bridge between Crimea and Russia that is secure and not threatened was the next option and the whole seperatist construct is part of this setup. Now, going back to the likelihood of small nukes and creating a 'no go' area in this part of the world (ZNPP meltdown anyone?). Everything else we see is fluff basically from what I see, although the comment on industry and raw materials may have some value.

The scuttle about the Russian gas supplies and the Nordstream 2 pipeline are really non events, N2 never went online so never figures into the equation in terms of capacity losses. Ukraine was entitled to royalties from the pipelines crossing their territory, as in the case of every major pipeline and transmission service around the world and once the royalty amount became disputed the predictable response was a 'product tax'. Have a look at the numbers of pipelines exporting gas out of Russia, and how do you think the storage levels in the EU are still increasing with the N1 pipeline out of service? As always the comment that media reporting is not correct is entirely true, but also the other point is correct in that this has been on the slow boil since the breakup of the USSR. There's always something going on in the background when a major block fragments like the USSR did, and there are still potential flashpoints in the Kaliningrad area and Transnistria for a couple.

In terms of propellant and component shortages, with the consumption in the current conflict I cannot see anything returning back to 'normal' stock levels any time soon. Plants will literally be running 24/7 producing milspec product and shipping it out as fast as they can package it. Not only do we have the actual useage of munitions, but every nation in the area is trying to rebuild stockpiles of everything from small arms to medium calibre to heavy artillery. Unfortunately for civilian shooting sports, that is everything we use!

Originally Posted by No.3

Ahhhhh - not actually taking sides on the entire Russian/Ukrainian family squabble thing, bit off topic but here we go anyway...

I wasn't intending to comment on Russian aggression just the apparent stupidity behind the strategic and tactical factors by which they reached the decision to lauch a large-scale invasion at that time. It might not have started out as a decision to mount a large scale invasion, but equally after the initial failures Russia could have made a more sane decision to stick their tail between their legs and sod off home rather than doubling down and proceeding to shower the landscape in blood. Standard military doctrine states that Russia by keeping it a 'special military operation' has tied themselves to an eventual failure simply due to attrition and not being able to field sufficient manpower to maintain control over the battlefield (Russian law prevents large-scale military and industrial mobilisation without a declaration of war - and in any event the effects of the sanctions in limiting access to technology probably prevents much of a ramp-up in industrial capacity now anyway). It does have the effect of making light nuclear weapon use somewhat more likely too. In the same vein, Ukrainian mobilisation is probably too slow to reach a critical level of troops to efficiently and effectively force the Russian units back out of contested lands - leading to 'stalemate' which has been much bandied about and misused by the media. Ukrainian use of more modern tech weapons has only really levelled the playing field and not resulted in a shift in the balance - this is another factor tying Russia down further into a war of attrition.

Any way you look at it, this is more costly than any engagement since WW2 with a faster casualty rate in manpower, equipment and munitions than just about every action Russia has been involved in in the last 30 years combined. The stats don't lie, and against things going forwards - winter is coming. All that happens in that part of the world in winter in terms of warfare is people dying - bad juju's.

Talking further about the reasons behind the entire thing - Crimea houses the home port of the Black Sea fleet. Nuf said - without own-country control of that base tensions were always going to occur as soon as the host nation tried to extract more for the favour of housing the fleet. If you look at the bridge between Russia and Crimea - and particularly the speed at which the bridge was built after 2014 there was a large amount of the preplanning gone into that design prior to 2014 and the eventual annexation. Unfortunately the bridge is only good for light vehicles, so a land bridge between Crimea and Russia that is secure and not threatened was the next option and the whole seperatist construct is part of this setup. Now, going back to the likelihood of small nukes and creating a 'no go' area in this part of the world (ZNPP meltdown anyone?). Everything else we see is fluff basically from what I see, although the comment on industry and raw materials may have some value.

The scuttle about the Russian gas supplies and the Nordstream 2 pipeline are really non events, N2 never went online so never figures into the equation in terms of capacity losses. Ukraine was entitled to royalties from the pipelines crossing their territory, as in the case of every major pipeline and transmission service around the world and once the royalty amount became disputed the predictable response was a 'product tax'. Have a look at the numbers of pipelines exporting gas out of Russia, and how do you think the storage levels in the EU are still increasing with the N1 pipeline out of service? As always the comment that media reporting is not correct is entirely true, but also the other point is correct in that this has been on the slow boil since the breakup of the USSR. There's always something going on in the background when a major block fragments like the USSR did, and there are still potential flashpoints in the Kaliningrad area and Transnistria for a couple.

In terms of propellant and component shortages, with the consumption in the current conflict I cannot see anything returning back to 'normal' stock levels any time soon. Plants will literally be running 24/7 producing milspec product and shipping it out as fast as they can package it. Not only do we have the actual useage of munitions, but every nation in the area is trying to rebuild stockpiles of everything from small arms to medium calibre to heavy artillery. Unfortunately for civilian shooting sports, that is everything we use!

I think that we all have to accept that the conflict has been 'forced'. It is all about money cycled through armaments contracts and nothing to do with 'saving Ukraine'. US involvement in Ukraine is a dirty business. Joe Biden was in charge of policy in Ukraine after the civil war broke out in 2014. His son Hunter and his brother James were being paid US150,000 per month as 'representatives' on a Ukraine energy company board. Half of this was paid to Joe Biden - as shown by Hunters Laptop. Nancy Peolsi's grandson was similarly involved as was John Kerrys son.

I see it thus: Stir up trouble somewhere in the world, issue 'arms aid' and direct sales contracts for items, a lot of which are never made and cannot be traced anyway and the arms companies cycle money back to Biden, Pelosi, Obama, Bush etc - the swamp as Trump called them.
The Pelosi visit to Taiwan has resulted in something like 1.8 Billion of arms sales already and no doubt 'windfall profits' in the swamp.

As far as Crimea goes, without picking sides it is pretty obvious that Russia would never relinquish it's Naval base. Crimea was part of Russia for 300 years and the population is 80% Russian. Russia only transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 to increase the ethnic Russian population in Ukraine. Crimea remained autonomous ( own Govt) inside Ukraine and then following the referendum rejoined Russia.
Ukraine has cut off the fresh water supply to civilian Crimea, hardly a humanitarian act.
Crimea had originally been an “autonomous republic” (avtonomnaya respublika) in the RSFSR, but its status was changed to that of an “oblast’” (province) in the RSFSR in 1945, ostensibly because the forced removal of the Crimean Tatars had eliminated the need for autonomy. After the Crimean oblast was transferred to the UkSSR in 1954, it retained the status of an oblast’ within Soviet Ukraine for 37 years. In early 1991, after a referendum was held in the UkrSSR and a resolution was adopted a month later by the UkrSSR parliament, the status of Crimea was upgraded to that of an “autonomous republic.” Crimea retained that designation within Ukraine after the Soviet Union broke apart. In the Russian Federation, however, the category of “autonomous republic” does not exist. In the treaty of annexation signed by the Russian and Crimean governments on 18 March 2014, the status of the peninsula was changed to simply a “republic” (Respublika Krym), joining 21 other “republics” of the Russian Federation’s now-85 federal “subjects,” with Crimea and the city of Sevastopol added as separate entities.[[3]

One of the ironies of the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 is that when the chairman of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet, Kliment Voroshilov, offered his closing remarks at the session on 19 February 1954, he declared that “enemies of Russia” had “repeatedly tried to take the Crimean peninsula from Russia and use it to steal and ravage Russian lands.” He praised the “joint battles” waged by “the Russian and Ukrainian peoples” as they inflicted a “severe rebuff against the insolent usurpers.” Voroshilov’s characterization of Russia’s past “enemies” seems eerily appropriate today in describing Russia’s own actions vis-à-vis Ukraine. A further tragic irony of the Crimean transfer is that an action of sixty years ago, taken by Moscow to strengthen its control over Ukraine, has come back to haunt Ukraine today.

Mark Kramer is Director of the Cold War Studies Program at Harvard University and a Senior Fellow of Harvard's Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies

Documents

I see this conflict being drawn out as long as possible to extract the maximum profits, meaning years of component shortages for us.
The big winner will be China, they will get Russian Gas and Oil at bargain prices and will out compete European manufacturing that has depended on cheap Russian Energy.

Black Powder and cast lead ahead !