5 ms·
Seems to be a confirmation of the thesis that is emerging after last week Kharkov's debacle: Russia is starting to pivot to the tried and tested strategy of sup
by mamonster 4y ago
Seems to be a confirmation of the thesis that is emerging after last week Kharkov's debacle: Russia is starting to pivot to the tried and tested strategy of supply line sabotage to try and win.
Putin ruled out voluntary mobilization multiple times, which means that Russia is at a manpower disadvantage and cannot attack(the "voluntary" mobilization story is developing, but anyway Russia probably doesn't want to try to attack in winter). The mobilized Ukrainian soldiers are out of the civilian economy while they are deployed, so cannot contribute. Taking out power also increases civilian migration pressures. Seems like Putin is increasingly going to force NATO/Europe/US to support Ukraine with actual food/electricity/water/etc instead of loan forgiveness and weapons, which will probably be tough in winter.
The above strategy is obviously some sort of war crime, but question is what sort of response will come from US/NATO/Europe that would stop Putin from this pivot(if it is indeed ocurring).
- edgineer 4y agoHow would you respond to Russian claims that missile attacks had been launched from the facility?
- jackmott 4y ago“good, leave. invading another people is abhorrent” The invasion is the war crime and should have been enough for the whole world to respond en masse to refuse allow it. The world should do the same if the USA ever invades anywhere again as well.
- mamonster 4y agoIt is certainly plausible, Ukrainians have made no secret of them stationing troops / weapons in civilian buildings, their argument being that since they are defending against aggression on their homeland they can station them wherever they want(and it is a perfectly legitimate argument). I wouldn't really trust Russian MoD either though.
- dvfjsdhgfv 4y ago> It is certainly plausible What would be the motivation? What would they gain? It makes zero sense to destroy their own country. Russia, on the other hand, has several reasons to do so.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- lawn 4y agoIt's of course ridiculous, together with all the other reasons Russia has given for then having to "protect" Ukraine by invading them and raping, torturing, murdering and deporting their children.
- jusssi 4y agoWhy would anyone give any credibility to what a russian says in 2022?
- edgineer 4y agoThat may simply be the answer; that they are liars. This specific claim has a video [0] to go with it. In general, when it comes to anything in war involving the word "nuclear," we would be unwise to plug our ear's to the enemy's motivations. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jSQw35mJrA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jSQw35mJrA
- jusssi 4y agoIt's unfortunate that they seem to have chosen maximum disinformation as a strategy for their official communications (not maximum confusion which would require significant amount of truth around the fabrications). Meanwhile their citizens say what they believe keeps them away from prison and high up windows. But that's what the situation is now. Putting any effort into reviewing their claims is a waste. It'll be a hell of an effort for them to rebuild their credibility.
- madspindel 4y ago> but question is what sort of response will come from US/NATO/Europe that would stop Putin from this pivot(if it is indeed occurring). EUFOR Ukraine, I would guess...
- curiousgal 4y ago> The above strategy is obviously some sort of war crime, but question is what sort of response will come from US/NATO/Europe You're expecting countries with a history of war crimes to do more than condemning war crimes?