Or it is misdirection to make the Russian overcommit, and then be crushed by a counterattack from the Ukrainian reserves. A modern version of the Parthian shot.

Note that I am not claiming either way. Just that you should always consider the misdirection motive in war. Feinted retreats into ambush are a classic tactic.

Belarus is a semi-puppet state of Russia, with the unpopular dictator Lukashenko being kept in power by Russians military might. As a Russian puppet state, Russians keeps publicly trying to get Belarus to send their troops into Ukraine, but that would be extremely unpopular to the Belarusian population. So Lukashenko keeps making anti-Ukraine and anti-NATO noises to placate Putin, while at the same time doing everything he can to find and loudly talk about excuses to not actually send their troops into Ukraine.

As I said, tragedy of the commons.

It seems almost certain that some level of misuse has to be happening. On the other hand, the combat effectiveness of the Ukrainians puts an upper limit to the level of misuse, at a level which is probably acceptable.

It has always amazed me that the anti-tax Republicans are seemingly so happy to pay for the US's outsized military budget. The US could get away with spending much less tax and debt on its military.

That said, military aid to Ukraine is a much better use of tax money than many other parts of military expenditure. For example, the nationbuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan were colossal wastes of money for little benefit, often without even a coherent achievable end goal or plan, yet I don't remember Republicans being very vocal about them.

Ukraine as a whole would not gain anything by misuse. But individual corrupt officers or officials inside Ukraine could misuse aid for personal gain. Tragedy of the commons.

The NAZI stab in the back propaganda against Jews contained arguments like Jews controlling society etc.. Russia will almost certainly make their own stab-in-the-back retcon if they lose, to avoid the blame going to leaders like Putin. Highly placed Jews are absolutely not safe, in fact they will make excellent scapegoats, and Jewish oligarch wealth will be free money when confiscated.

Jews are somehow always among the first to be persecuted. Some Jews are already leaving for that reason. The Chief Rabbi of Moscow does not dare return to Russia until the situation changes.

Going out of your way to keep Elizabeth II on, even after she should not normally be, is more worshipful than just putting the current King on as is normal.

Worshiping old things instead of the current status quo just seems kinda bizarre to me.

They did flatter him, but you can clearly recognize him without any problems. I think they did a good compromise. Official portraits are supposed to be flattering.

Most old things seem timeless to people who lived them. Then people get used to the new things, and then those new things become old and timeless.

They will continue in circulation until individually removed due to wear and tear.

I see you have not heard of Charles II of Spain.

Maybe he is criticizing Queen Elizabeth II for having her face on the currency for all these years?

I think it is quite a nice picture.

Either the current monarch's face, or no face. Keeping the Queen's face on the currency would seem backwards and silly to me.

He doesn't look that healthy, and believes in health pseudoscience, so there is a good chance he is not following medical expert advice. I would certainly not bet on him living as long as his mother.

How is it tacky? The money has always had the reigning monarch on it.

Tacky would be not to do it, to wallow in nostalgia about the previous monarch, in deliberate ignorance of the current status.

Russia has been attacking Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, which all the experts say will not work to break Ukrainian will to fight. But at the same time, it surely hardens EU will to support Ukraine.

Russia's actions at the strategic level are utter idiocy. I guess Russia thinks actions like that make they appear strong and ruthless?