5 ms·

The US conducts war with a scalpel. Russia does it with a rusty hatchet. Those cruise missiles from Russia are (relatively speaking) very cheap and inaccurate

The US conducts war with a scalpel. Russia does it with a rusty hatchet. Those cruise missiles from Russia are (relatively speaking) very cheap and inaccurate.

guimplen 3y ago
In all recent US wars civilian casualties vastly outnumber military ones. In the Ukrainian war civilian casualties constitute less than 10% of overall casualties. Outstanding precision for a rusty hatchet.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  Most recent US wars have spent most of their time in an asymmetric counterinsurgency phase, the Russo-Ukrainian war is (in style of warfare) basically a symmetric force-on-force international war. These have very different dynamics, inherently.
  - gpderetta 3y ago
    We also don't know the full extent of civilian casualties.
93po 3y ago
This reads like propaganda. The US military does a fine job of destroying entire countries
- getpokedagain 3y ago
  It's actually worse. I read this as Russia accidentally hits civilians because they have no choice where as we do it with intention.
  - meepmorp 3y ago
    Russia hitting civilians isn’t really accidental. They’re quite happy to terrorize the population, and are quite comfortable deliberately committing atrocities (see Bucha, et al). Flattening whole cities is longstanding practice of theirs, too; it’s largely how they won Chechnya 2. At best, their weapons aren’t terribly precise and they don’t particularly care about that.
    - leosarev 3y ago
      Using cruise missiles to terrorise civilian population will be incredibly stupid move. Hits into houses are usually accidental. If you want to terrorise civilian population, it's so much cost effective to use cheaper unguided rockets from MLRS systems or artillery shells. You have this news in your echo chamber, haven't you?
      - meepmorp 3y ago
        It's not that more precise weapons are being used to target civilians, it's just that if they miss the target, the Russians aren't really heartbroken about it. There's plenty of examples of "precision" weapons hitting apartment buildings, train stations, hospitals, schools, etc. I don't think those are targeted specifically, just that any carelessness isn't considered a bug. But the "echo chamber" framing you use for what's at best a nitpick/misinterpretation of what I said, that says so much more about you and your own biases than anything about me.
        leosarev 3y ago
        "the Russians aren't really heartbroken about it" - I don't understand this. How you can make such assumptions about hearts? Definitely there is a grief from common Russian people and denial of willingness from Russian propaganda. I don't know if Putin personally "heartbroken" and neither do you.
        93po 3y ago
        > if they miss the target, the Russians aren't really heartbroken about it. Something like 90% of deaths by US military are civilians, and huge chunk of that is women and children. This isn't a uniquely Russian thing.
pi-e-sigma 3y ago
I advise you to educate yourself. The US killed 300 thousand civilians in the second Iraq war using their 'precision' strikes. That compares to 10 thousand civilians who died so far in the Ukrainian war. Both of these numbers are provided by the US gov itself.
- jjtheblunt 3y ago
  > Both of these numbers are provided by the US gov itself. URL? that's got to be super interesting data.
  - pi-e-sigma 3y ago
    Wikileaks. Obviously US gov wouldn't say something like that publicly so you need to look into the leaked classified material.
klooney 3y ago
Mosul, Fallujah, etc were quite bloody. You can't actually take cities cleanly, you can only win the propaganda war in your own sphere of influence.
greedo 3y ago
Russian cruise missiles (true ones, not Shahed drones) are not cheap. Kalibrs cost around $6 million USD, KH-101s around $13 million. And both are quite accurate. The issue the Russians are facing isn't inaccurate cruise missiles, but a lack of accurate targeting data (combined with wanting to use them in terror attacks as opposed to degrading Ukraine's military capabilities.)

The US conducts war with a scalpel. Russia does it with a rusty hatchet. Those cruise missiles from Russia are (relatively speaking) very cheap and inaccurate.

guimplen 3y ago

In all recent US wars civilian casualties vastly outnumber military ones. In the Ukrainian war civilian casualties constitute less than 10% of overall casualties. Outstanding precision for a rusty hatchet.

dragonwriter 3y ago
Most recent US wars have spent most of their time in an asymmetric counterinsurgency phase, the Russo-Ukrainian war is (in style of warfare) basically a symmetric force-on-force international war. These have very different dynamics, inherently.
- gpderetta 3y ago
  We also don't know the full extent of civilian casualties.

93po 3y ago

This reads like propaganda. The US military does a fine job of destroying entire countries

getpokedagain 3y ago
It's actually worse. I read this as Russia accidentally hits civilians because they have no choice where as we do it with intention.
- meepmorp 3y ago
  Russia hitting civilians isn’t really accidental. They’re quite happy to terrorize the population, and are quite comfortable deliberately committing atrocities (see Bucha, et al). Flattening whole cities is longstanding practice of theirs, too; it’s largely how they won Chechnya 2. At best, their weapons aren’t terribly precise and they don’t particularly care about that.
  - leosarev 3y ago
    Using cruise missiles to terrorise civilian population will be incredibly stupid move. Hits into houses are usually accidental. If you want to terrorise civilian population, it's so much cost effective to use cheaper unguided rockets from MLRS systems or artillery shells. You have this news in your echo chamber, haven't you?
    - meepmorp 3y ago
      It's not that more precise weapons are being used to target civilians, it's just that if they miss the target, the Russians aren't really heartbroken about it. There's plenty of examples of "precision" weapons hitting apartment buildings, train stations, hospitals, schools, etc. I don't think those are targeted specifically, just that any carelessness isn't considered a bug. But the "echo chamber" framing you use for what's at best a nitpick/misinterpretation of what I said, that says so much more about you and your own biases than anything about me.
      - leosarev 3y ago
        "the Russians aren't really heartbroken about it" - I don't understand this. How you can make such assumptions about hearts? Definitely there is a grief from common Russian people and denial of willingness from Russian propaganda. I don't know if Putin personally "heartbroken" and neither do you.
      - 93po 3y ago
        > if they miss the target, the Russians aren't really heartbroken about it. Something like 90% of deaths by US military are civilians, and huge chunk of that is women and children. This isn't a uniquely Russian thing.

pi-e-sigma 3y ago

I advise you to educate yourself. The US killed 300 thousand civilians in the second Iraq war using their 'precision' strikes. That compares to 10 thousand civilians who died so far in the Ukrainian war. Both of these numbers are provided by the US gov itself.

jjtheblunt 3y ago
> Both of these numbers are provided by the US gov itself. URL? that's got to be super interesting data.
- pi-e-sigma 3y ago
  Wikileaks. Obviously US gov wouldn't say something like that publicly so you need to look into the leaked classified material.

klooney 3y ago

Mosul, Fallujah, etc were quite bloody. You can't actually take cities cleanly, you can only win the propaganda war in your own sphere of influence.

greedo 3y ago

Russian cruise missiles (true ones, not Shahed drones) are not cheap. Kalibrs cost around $6 million USD, KH-101s around $13 million. And both are quite accurate. The issue the Russians are facing isn't inaccurate cruise missiles, but a lack of accurate targeting data (combined with wanting to use them in terror attacks as opposed to degrading Ukraine's military capabilities.)