War and love kisses…

May 20

Shalom,

My dear friends, and have a pleased Shabbat to all of you. I hope you are doing well and enjoying this beautiful day with your loved ones. I wish you all the best in love and health, as those are the most important things in life. It would be interesting to share the history of kisses while we're about love. While kisses can occasionally be bitter and painful, they can also be sweet and passionate. Nonetheless, they are integral to human expression and have been around for millions of years. So, let's take a journey through time and explore the fascinating world of kisses (The earliest recorded kiss goes back at least 4,500 years to Mesopotamia…) and of the war (Military reasons why Ukraine will not be defeated: a ground operations perspective…) together.

Cheers...

Foreword…

Love Kisses…

The Italian philosopher of love and erotism, Alberto Alberoni (born 31 December 1929 in Borgonovo Val Tidone, Piacenza, Italy), was a man of many contradictions. He was both a warrior and a lover, a fierce defender of his beliefs and a passionate advocate for the power of love. His writings about war and its effects on society were insightful and thought-provoking, but his musings on the nature of love truly captured the hearts and minds of his millions of readers. Indeed, the effects of the violence of war and love kisses are very different. War causes devastation, anarchy, and suffering. Contrarily, love offers warmth, comfort, and delight. But what happens when the two collide? It's a strange and confusing feeling, like being caught in the crossfire of opposing forces. It's that feeling of wanting to love someone but being afraid to get hurt. It's the feeling of wanting to fight for what you believe in but not wanting to harm those you love. It's a delicate balance that requires patience, understanding, and a willingness to compromise. But if you can find that balance, if you can learn to love and fight at the same time, then you'll indeed be unstoppable. It's hard to predict what the future holds for this issue. But one thing's for sure - we must go through chaos to reach a state of peace. It may be challenging...

The War…

In their ancestral conflict, somebody must be defeated Russia or Ukraine. Sadly, is this the only solution to the world's problems? Everything indicates that yes, if we take into consideration the latest news of the G7 coming paradoxically from the island of Hiroshima in Japan. The confrontation between Russia and Ukraine has gotten out of hand, may be from the beginning.

Why?

Megalomania produces blindness, leading to delusions of grandeur and false realities. This is why megalomania blinds those who suffer from it and prevents them from a genuine connection with reality. Everything remains on the surface of the imagination. And this is the case with President Vladimir Putin. This mental health condition prevented him from genuinely analysing the risks of the invasion of Ukraine. Perhaps President Putin envisaged that a significant part of the world's nations would join the Ukrainian cause. Even Russia's friendly countries have been very reserved in their positions about the conflict.

It's important to remember that many complex and varied issues affect our world beyond just one regional military conflict. This battle has unfortunately distracted us from finding lasting solutions to problems like poverty, climate change, terrorism, and inequality that require global cooperation….

How long could it possibly take to bring about peace?

It's hard to predict what the future holds for this issue. But one thing's for sure - we must go through chaos to reach a state of peace. It may not be easy...

Military reasons why Ukraine will not be defeated: a ground operations perspective…

Professor, International University of Japan, Noboru Yamaguchi, Military History and Strategy, International Security Policy and Strategy, Japan-U.S. Alliance.

A little more than a year after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, there are still no signs that Ukraine will be defeated. At the start of the war, Russian forces rapidly closed on the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv, and Ukraine’s fate was in doubt. However, the Ukrainians held firm, and on April 6, only six weeks after the war began, a senior U.S. Defense Department official revealed the official position that Russian forces had completely withdrawn from the front of Kyiv.[1] Why is it that Russia, which was seen as overwhelmingly superior, is unexpectedly struggling, and conversely, the Ukrainian military is exceeding expectations in its performance? This article will examine this question while focusing on ground operations in the traditional sense. It is important to note that Ukraine is fighting well in the information and cyber domains as well, but these issues will be examined on a separate occasion.

International support

International support from Western countries, the backdrop of Ukraine’s performance, should not be overlooked. It is not widely known, but NATO countries and other Western societies have supported Ukraine in various ways since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. For example, the U.S. sent a total of 364 personnel on military aid missions to Ukraine in 2015, immediately after the annexation of Crimea, including 310 training support personnel.[2] In 2021, the year before the Russian invasion, a military advisory group of 200 Canadians, 30 Lithuanians, 40 Poles, and 150 Americans helped train and modernize the Ukrainian army.[3] That support has greatly expanded since the invasion last year, including the provision of enormous amounts of weapons and ammunition. According to press reports, as of last fall, the U.S. had already provided more than $16.8 billion in military assistance.[4] In the broader context of information and cyber warfare, Western government agencies as well as information companies like Microsoft and Amazon have been assisting Ukraine primarily in the areas of training personnel for cyber security, institutional reform, and system strengthening in order to strengthen Ukraine's cyber defense capabilities.[5]

Demographics and troop replacement

In both Russia and Ukraine, as in Japan, the birthrate is declining and the younger population cohort is aging, so recruiting soldiers is not always easy. Despite this, many high-ranking officers in the Russian military have led operations with a disregard for human life, based on the mistaken belief that the human resources available to replenish the military are inexhaustible.[6] It has been noted since the mid-2010s that the Russian military has had serious problems recruiting soldiers. The demographic pressure of a declining youth population, the reduction of the conscription period to one year, and the introduction of a volunteer army system aimed at training professional soldiers have made recruitment difficult for the Russian armed forces. The fill rate for each service was as low as 82% as of 2014. Despite a slight turnaround since then, the volunteer recruitment targets set in the initial period of military modernization have not been met, and as a result, about one-third of soldiers are still conscripts who have received little training.[7] Russia's total population in 2020 was about 146 million with a fertility rate (birth per woman) of 1.51, similar to Japan's population of about 126 million with a fertility rate of 1.34. In such a society, if operational command is executed without regard to the loss of soldiers, recruitment will naturally become difficult. Moreover, it will lower the morale of soldiers and result in the loss of trust and support from the families of the soldiers, in other words, the people, for the military.

Ukraine has experienced demographics similar to those in Russia and has had problems with the high turnover of military personnel. Ironically, because of this problem, there are many young people among the general public who have received serious military training, and as a result, they have made an additional de facto reserve force.[8] Thus, in formulating its invasion plan, the Russian military made the mistake of underestimating Ukraine's mobilization capacity.

Wartime leadership and operational command

The International Institute for Strategic Studies, a British think tank, says the main reasons Russia is struggling are overconfidence in its own forces and underestimating its enemy.[9] Russia deployed 150,000 troops at the start of the war, but it clearly overreached in its objective. Russia's invasion plan envisioned a short decisive battle—a blitzkrieg so to speak—based on the premise that Ukraine would be overthrown within 10 days of the outbreak of war and the entire country would be pacified and annexed by August. The early capture of Kyiv would force the Ukrainian leadership to flee and the state would collapse. There was also the optimistic scenario that the pro-Russia population in Ukraine would support the Russian military as it advanced. From the Marco Polo Bridge Incident of 1937 until the end of World War II in 1945, the Japanese military deployed up to over one million troops in northern China, and area roughly the size of Ukraine. However, it could only control major towns on and areas around rail lines—in other words, points and lines. It was impossible to control a country 1.5 times the size of Japan with just over half the number of troops of the modern Self-Defense Forces.

At the tactical level, the Ukrainian military appears to be outperforming the Russian military in operational command. Since the beginning of the war, both sides have stressed the leadership of junior commanders. It is said that the Russian military gave 127 Battalion Tactical Groups (BTGs) areas of operation and tasks to accomplish during the invasion. A BTG consists of 600-800 men and is a compact but independent unit with several infantry companies as well as artillery, air defense, engineering, and logistical support functions. The aim of this formation is for relatively small units to disperse and maneuver autonomously to quickly settle the battle under fluid conditions. The keys to this, however, are the judgment of the junior commanders in the smaller units under the battalion commander and information-sharing among the dispersed units. More simply put, a BTG is an organization that relies on the abilities of junior and non-commissioned officers. Unlike the armies of the U.S. and NATO countries, this formation is not suitable for the Russian military, which lacks professional volunteer soldiers. As a result, it has been observed that the Russian military itself has abandoned this concept.[10]

Since 2014, Ukrainian forces have been engaging Russian troops for nearly a decade, albeit at low intensity. During this period, preparations have always been made with an escalation (i.e., a large-scale invasion) by Russian forces in mind. In particular, mid- and junior-ranked officers have been rotated to several fronts and tasked with becoming familiar with the terrain of each front and the tactics of the Russians.[11] In addition, Air Force fighter pilots were repeatedly trained to fly at very low altitudes over their own country in preparation for action under Russian air superiority from the beginning of an escalation, and they were well versed in the terrain before the actual battle. The difference with the Russian soldiers, who, to keep battle plans secret, were not even informed of their participation in the actual battle, to say nothing of the situation at the front where they would be deployed, is significant.

High-tech and legacy weapons

Among the Western support, it seems that the Ukrainian military relied heavily on relatively small and inexpensive high-tech weapons and legacy weapons such as conventional tube artillery, rocket launchers, and tanks. The impact of the portable anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles has been particularly striking. The Javelin, a mobile anti-tank guided missile, has a range of 2,000 meters and, in top attack mode, penetrates the thinly armored top of the turret at a steep angle over the tank's head.[12] The armor on the upper part of the turret, in other words the ceiling of the fighting compartment where the crew acts, is not very thick because technology to attack tanks from overhead has never been put to practical use. However, an increasing number of recent anti-tank missiles, like the Javelin, have top attack capability. Furthermore, in Soviet and Russian tanks, the area under the floor of the fighting compartment is used as an ammunition storage compartment, and there are no bulkheads to protect the fighting compartment. Therefore, when they are hit by a top attack, the shells stored beneath tend to ignite, causing a large explosion. This is why scenes of Russian tank turrets flying up in the air like a jack-in-the-box are frequently reported.

The role of legacy weapons like conventional artillery has also been significant. In addition to pinpointing and destroying targets with precision-guided weapons, ground combat often requires, for example, barraging enemy infantry positions to prevent them from moving or acting. This is when the number of punches, like jabs in boxing, becomes important. When the author attended the Halifax International Security Forum in Canada last November, one of the most frequently heard phrases was “155-millimeter shells.” The Ukrainian military has worked in recent years to strengthen its artillery firepower with howitzers, other barrel artillery and multiple rocket launchers. This is based on the experience that since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, 90% of casualties in engagements with Russian forces have been caused by artillery. As a result, a comparison of Russian and Ukrainian troop strength at the beginning of the war shows that while Russia had an overwhelming advantage in total troop strength (900,000 to 210,000 troops) the difference in artillery was not at a decisive point (2,433 guns to 1,176 guns and 3,547 multiple rocket launchers to 1,680).[13] Furthermore, the combat efficiency of Ukrainian artillery is said to be higher than that of Russian artillery.[14] This is due to the fact that while the Ukrainian military uses the same artillery as the Russian military, it also makes extensive use of drones to search for targets and observe fire, and utilizes digital command and control systems to efficiently operate its artillery units.

Lessons about the importance of stockpiling ammunition

The important role of artillery means a great deal of ammunition consumption, and there are questions about whether ammunition production capacity can supply the required amount. The U.S. and other NATO countries have provided Ukraine with more than 150 155-mm howitzers since the war began last year.[15] On average, the Ukrainian military consumes 3,000 rounds of 155-mm ammunition per day, or 90,000 rounds a month.[16] In contrast, the U.S. in its entirety produces 14,000 rounds of this ammunition per month, meaning it takes six months to produce the monthly consumption of the Ukrainian military. With this unexpectedly high consumption of artillery shells and missiles, the U.S. Department of Defense has begun to strengthen its ammunition production base to about three times its current level, but this will take time. In the case of 155-mm shells, it appears the U.S. will reach its target of producing 20,000 shells per month by spring 2023 and 40,000 per month by 2025.[17]

This is an instructive lesson for the defense of Japan. To begin with, ammunition is less flashy than the weapons themselves, and the effects of the investment are difficult to see. Moreover, while a budget request for a naval vessel or fighter plane cannot be reduced by half, ammunition, like a liquid, can be cut by any percentage. Furthermore, procuring ammunition requires ammunition storage facilities. The fact that it is not easy to secure land to build ammunition depots in densely populated Japan has been one of the factors reducing the willingness to allocate spending for ammunition procurement. With the defense budget expected to increase, it is urgent that resources are invested in ammunition stockpiling, which has been neglected.

Conclusion

As stated at the beginning of this article, there are no signs that Ukraine will lose. As long as Western support continues, Russia does not seem to have a means to win. However, it is hard to imagine Russia losing. This can be explained for purely tactical reasons: The farther the Ukrainian counteroffensive goes, the longer the supply lines will become, and the more threatening the enemy will be. As the author noted in a previous article,[18] it is strategically inadvisable to put Russia in such a position given the fear of an escalation to the use of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, there is no hope that this war will end in the short term because neither side can easily compromise on the current situation. It will take a long time to reduce the level of engagement and bring the situation to a point where it could be considered a standoff. In other words, it will take years just to bring the current state closer to a situation similar to the 38th parallel on the Korean Peninsula.

The earliest recorded kiss goes back at least 4,500 years to Mesopotamia

Researchers cite clay tablets and other materials that push back evidence of kissing by about 1,000 years

THE NEW YORKER By Mark Johnson, May 18, 2023

Couples kiss after midnight during the 2013 New Year's Eve celebration in New York City's Times Square. (Christopher Gregory/Getty Images)

When was the first kiss? Recent papers have suggested that romantic or sexual kissing began 3,500 years ago in what is now India. But a new review paper in the journal Science says that this style of kissing is also mentioned in clay tablets from Mesopotamia that predate the Indian texts by about a thousand years.

Danish husband and wife researchers Troels Pank Arboll and Sophie Lund Rasmussen stress that “the behavior did not emerge abruptly or in a specific society, but appears to have been practiced in multiple ancient cultures,” including Egypt.

Arboll and Rasmussen note that “the act of kissing may have played a secondary and unintentional role throughout history” by enabling disease-causing microorganisms to spread from one mouth to another. But the kiss, they write, “cannot be regarded as a sudden biological trigger” that led to societies being deluged by pathogens.

The two researchers launched on their search for the earliest kiss last summer while discussing a paper on the ancient DNA of the herpes simplex virus 1 at the dinner table. The herpes paper had noted a shift in the transmission of the virus during the Bronze Age (2,000 to 700 B.C.), “potentially linked” to new cultural practices “such as the advent of sexual-romantic kissing.”

New? Bronze Age? Really?

“I said to Sophie that I knew we had something older. And then I started digging a bit into that,” said Arboll, an assistant professor of Assyriology at the University of Copenhagen who studies ancient accounts of medical diagnoses, prescriptions and healing rituals.
“We’re a very nerdy couple,” explained Rasmussen, an ecologist at the University of Oxford’s Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU) and Aalborg University in Denmark.

Arboll had little trouble finding accounts of kissing from Mesopotamia written in both the Sumerian and Akkadian languages. He and Rasmussen noted too a calcite sculpture in the British Museum called the “Ain Sakhri Lovers,” which was found in caves near Bethlehem and is estimated to be about 11,000 years old.

“It had been known for decades in my field,” Arboll said of the written accounts of kissing from Mesopotamia.
“The thing about Assyriologists,” Rasmussen said, “is they like to argue with each other, but they don’t really talk to other people.”

That could explain why some experts adopted India as the place of origin for kissing, though Arboll has a different theory:

"I think one of the sources they cite are manuals like the Kama Sutra,” he said, referring to texts estimated to have been published between 2,400 and 1,700 years ago. “That’s obviously very appealing for discussing sexual behavior, I imagine.”

In her 2011 book “The Science of Kissing: What Our Lips Are Telling Us,” Sheril Kirshenbaum reported the earliest literary evidence for human kissing “dated back to India’s Vedic Sanskrit texts around 1500 B.C.” But she’s convinced the behavior goes back much further in history.

“We see so many similar behaviors across the animal kingdom — including in our closest relatives, like bonobos,” she said. “I suspect our species has been kissing for as long as we’ve been on Earth.”

There may have been practical reasons for humans to kiss, Rasmussen said. “I came across research suggesting that the purpose of kissing, why it could have evolved, is that it serves as an opportunity to evaluate your partner,” she said. “If you kiss somebody with poor teeth, they tend to have bad breath.”

Kissing may have allowed couples to bond and strengthen their relationship. “And of course also for sexual arousal,” said Rasmussen. “So when you want to mate and pass on your genes, it’s very convenient.”

Enjoying a romantic kiss outside the confines of marriage appears to have been frowned upon by the Mesopotamians. Arboll and Rasmussen came across the story of a married woman “almost led astray by a kiss from another man.” Worse, kissing someone who was not supposed to be sexually active, such as a priestess, they write, “was said to deprive the kisser of the ability to speak.”

Such prohibitions may have had the unintended benefit of protecting the good health of the kiss-deprived. The Danish researchers point out kissing’s likely role in spreading herpes simplex virus 1, Epstein-Barr virus and human parvovirus B19, which causes a rash. Such pathogens, the authors wrote, “can infect humans through a range of different transmission routes, including saliva, making any act of kissing a potential means of spreading infection.”

To date, though, science has had relatively little to say about kissing, according to Kirshenbaum, an academic specialist at Michigan State University.

A scientific literature search for “kiss” or “kissing” sends you through funky territory before you ever encounter two sets of lips. PubMed’s search engine begins with the KISS1 gene and its product kisspeptin, and proceeds to a cellular process called kiss-and-run. Google assumes that in seeking the “earliest known kiss,” you hope to find the earliest publicity photo of the rock band Kiss, or the earliest known Kiss tribute band.

“Here’s something that touches all of us,” Kirshenbaum said, “yet science has barely scratched the surface of it.”

An 11,000-year-old carving known as the “Ain Sakhri Lovers,” found in a cave system near Bethlehem, may be one of the earliest depictions of humans kissing. (British Museum)

The human fascination with kissing history comes as no surprise to Laura Weyrich, an associate professor of anthropology at Pennsylvania State University who co-authored one of the studies cited by the Danish researchers. Her paper, published in Nature in 2017, examined DNA from the dental plaque of Neanderthals and used it to infer information on their behavior, diet and disease.

Weyrich’s study noted that humans and Neanderthals may have traded microbes, which could have happened through the sharing of food or water sources — or through kissing.

In some interviews about the Neanderthal paper, Weyrich dispensed with the term “kissing” in favor of the more earthy alternative, swapping spit, and “biologically, it really is swapping spit,” she said.

Never let it be said that scientists lack romance.

There is some debate among researchers about whether kissing began in one place and spread or had “numerous independent origins,” as Arboll and Rasmussen write.

“My hunch is that kissing arose or was discovered amongst elite in complex societies (hierarchal, market systems with writing) and diffused outward,” William Jankowiak, a professor of anthropology at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, wrote in an email.

The practice of kissing, he said, was in keeping with “the elite pursuit of pleasure.”

Cooperate with objective and ethical thinking…

Germán & Co