23 ms·

I'm kind of suspicious of sources that impute propaganda motives for military tactics. It's not that it's impossible, it's just that Occam's razor suggests tha

by pydry 4y ago

I'm kind of suspicious of sources that impute propaganda motives for military tactics. It's not that it's impossible, it's just that Occam's razor suggests that all other things being equal, military attacks are probably executed for the purposes of achieving military advantage.

PeterisP 4y ago
I think it's quite reasonable to look at propaganda motives, since the whole campaign of missile barrages during the last year is obviously primarily for "breaking the will"/propaganda/strategic communication purposes, there is literally no military tactical value for target like a behind-the-lines power plant, only the demoralizing propaganda effect of the population being without power with the expectation that they might pressure Ukrainian leadership towards whatever Russia wants.
- pydry 4y ago
  >since the whole campaign of missile barrages during the last year is obviously primarily for "breaking the will I've read many articles that have claimed this but never seen a shred of evidence presented for it ever. It's just assumed. Always. In fact, a good half of the articles that claimed it and simultaneously explained that it was a terrible tactic that historically has never worked. There is quite a lot of historical evidence for this and I think it is very clearly true. I am equally certain Russia knows this. So... no evidence + claims of a self defeating stupid tactic suggests to me that they might be blowing up power stations for reasons other than "to break their will".
  - lm28469 4y ago
    Everything point to the fact that Russians are very wrong about a lot of their assumptions. What seems stupid to us come straight from their "how to war" textbooks
enkid 4y ago
All military actions are for a political purpose. Sometimes that's long term and sometimes it's short term. Trying to "get a win" to boost morale is quite common. Think Sherman taking Atlanta in time for Lincoln's 1864 election.
lm28469 4y ago
You should read their articles, they offer plenty of insights with sources. You shouldn't view Russia as a unified block, there seem to be a lot of internal drama and politics going on, especially between Wagner and the Russian MoD, Kadyrov &co Russia loves symbols too: dates, ceremonies, "retaliations", &c. you gotta put a good shows to keep the wheel spinning. And what military tactic is there to send inaccurate drones and missiles in civilian areas in the first place ? They're not even remotely close to the front https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/01/putins-russian-critics-are-growing-ever-louder/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/01/putins-russian-critics-... https://www.dw.com/en/russia-can-wagner-head-yevgeny-prigozhin-challenge-putin/a-64744266 https://www.dw.com/en/russia-can-wagner-head-yevgeny-prigozh...
- pydry 4y ago
  I dont view Russia as a wholly unified bloc (indeed, for personal reasons it would be a sheer impossibility for me to do so), and I'm well aware of prigozhin's trolling. I would find it hard to take that man at his word if he declared that the sky was blue. I dont think that there is any evidence that either are relevant here though. >And what military tactic is there to send inaccurate drones and missiles in civilian areas in the first place ? To tie up and overwhelm their air defences so that they have to be spread more thinly and can't be concentrated at the front. I forget the exact numbers but the drones were something like $10k and ended up being shot down by $500k missiles. Indeed it was an economically efficient tactic if the goal is to degrade ukrainian AA.
  - lm28469 4y ago
    > if the goal is to degrade ukrainian AA Why would you degrade Kyiv AA if you can't even take Bakhmut ? It's not like Kyiv AA will stop the Russian current operations 700km away
    - pydry 4y ago
      So that air power can safely be used in future offensives. AA deployed in Kiev is AA not deployed in Bakhmut.

by pydry 4y ago

PeterisP 4y ago

I think it's quite reasonable to look at propaganda motives, since the whole campaign of missile barrages during the last year is obviously primarily for "breaking the will"/propaganda/strategic communication purposes, there is literally no military tactical value for target like a behind-the-lines power plant, only the demoralizing propaganda effect of the population being without power with the expectation that they might pressure Ukrainian leadership towards whatever Russia wants.

pydry 4y ago
>since the whole campaign of missile barrages during the last year is obviously primarily for "breaking the will I've read many articles that have claimed this but never seen a shred of evidence presented for it ever. It's just assumed. Always. In fact, a good half of the articles that claimed it and simultaneously explained that it was a terrible tactic that historically has never worked. There is quite a lot of historical evidence for this and I think it is very clearly true. I am equally certain Russia knows this. So... no evidence + claims of a self defeating stupid tactic suggests to me that they might be blowing up power stations for reasons other than "to break their will".
- lm28469 4y ago
  Everything point to the fact that Russians are very wrong about a lot of their assumptions. What seems stupid to us come straight from their "how to war" textbooks

enkid 4y ago

All military actions are for a political purpose. Sometimes that's long term and sometimes it's short term. Trying to "get a win" to boost morale is quite common. Think Sherman taking Atlanta in time for Lincoln's 1864 election.

lm28469 4y ago

You should read their articles, they offer plenty of insights with sources. You shouldn't view Russia as a unified block, there seem to be a lot of internal drama and politics going on, especially between Wagner and the Russian MoD, Kadyrov &co Russia loves symbols too: dates, ceremonies, "retaliations", &c. you gotta put a good shows to keep the wheel spinning. And what military tactic is there to send inaccurate drones and missiles in civilian areas in the first place ? They're not even remotely close to the front https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/01/putins-russian-critics-are-growing-ever-louder/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/01/putins-russian-critics-... https://www.dw.com/en/russia-can-wagner-head-yevgeny-prigozhin-challenge-putin/a-64744266 https://www.dw.com/en/russia-can-wagner-head-yevgeny-prigozh...

pydry 4y ago
I dont view Russia as a wholly unified bloc (indeed, for personal reasons it would be a sheer impossibility for me to do so), and I'm well aware of prigozhin's trolling. I would find it hard to take that man at his word if he declared that the sky was blue. I dont think that there is any evidence that either are relevant here though. >And what military tactic is there to send inaccurate drones and missiles in civilian areas in the first place ? To tie up and overwhelm their air defences so that they have to be spread more thinly and can't be concentrated at the front. I forget the exact numbers but the drones were something like $10k and ended up being shot down by $500k missiles. Indeed it was an economically efficient tactic if the goal is to degrade ukrainian AA.
- lm28469 4y ago
  > if the goal is to degrade ukrainian AA Why would you degrade Kyiv AA if you can't even take Bakhmut ? It's not like Kyiv AA will stop the Russian current operations 700km away
  - pydry 4y ago
    So that air power can safely be used in future offensives. AA deployed in Kiev is AA not deployed in Bakhmut.