Russia-Ukraine War

[mr.WHO]

Given very little to none civilian casualties, I'm keen to bet it was fully prepared and supproted by Ukraine.

This will force Putin to shift even more AAA defense to Moscow, away from frontline.

Good, but risky move - it could turn ugly, if it would hit a kindergarden or something like that.

[chew-ie]

So we all forgot the Rebellion in Bakhmut a few days ago? I somehow doubt from all perspectives Ukraine having much to do with that, beginning with the question "what could Ukraine gain from that?"

Bakhmut revolted? Or are you refering to the russian partisan attacks in the Belgorod region?

I for one see it that way: before Ukraine is to be blaimed for any civilian casualities, Russia has to answer for their crimes against civilians. Of course this is no numbers game and there shouldn't be any civilian casualities at all. But for any propaganda outfit utilising this to blame Ukraine for anything it must be clear that Russia dwarfs all those [possible] incidients by a wide margin - as they are delibaretly attacking civilian areas for months now, let alone the Ukraine capital.

[burger1]

Moscow and the surrounding region is under drone bombardment.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... -buildings

If this was done done by Ukraine aligned forces, then it is not good. Attacks against civilian targets are not only amoral, but easily exploitable for propaganda.

Not civilian targets. Putin even has a residence in one of the areas and other members of the government have homes in the region. Ukraine denies launching the attack anyways. There's tons of stuff it's ok to blow up in Moscow due to it being part of the military/government. Doesn't seem like whoever launched the attack managed to take out any manufacturing sites or critical people.

[Alan Phipps]

If you believe the Russian statement about it, most of those drones were allegedly destroyed in the air and the few that weren't had their remote piloting control signals jammed and so terminated along uncontrolled courses. Hence the damage sustained was 'officially' either from intercept debris or semi-random groundings.

I think the psychological significance of the attack was that Muscovites can no longer assume that they are in a safe place as remote bystanders to the war. As to the strategic, political, and military advantages or disadvantages of the attack - well they remain to be seen.

[clakclak]

Moscow and the surrounding region is under drone bombardment.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... -buildings

If this was done done by Ukraine aligned forces, then it is not good. Attacks against civilian targets are not only amoral, but easily exploitable for propaganda.

Not civilian targets. Putin even has a residence in one of the areas and other members of the government have homes in the region. Ukraine denies launching the attack anyways. There's tons of stuff it's ok to blow up in Moscow due to it being part of the military/government. Doesn't seem like whoever launched the attack managed to take out any manufacturing sites or critical people.

If you attack "homes" in a residential area, than you are targeting civilian infrastructure. If these are homes of government officials their families will be living there as well, not just the officials. A non civilian target would for example be the office of the ministry of defence.

[Tamina]

Bakhmut revolted? Or are you refering to the russian partisan attacks in the Belgorod region?

I for one see it that way: before Ukraine is to be blaimed for any civilian casualities, Russia has to answer for their crimes against civilians. [...]

Yeh, those guys from the Belgorod region.

I think Whataboutism is neither a valid argument for Russia nor Ukraine but this "attack" or "not attack" (according to Russia) or whatever this incident was, just doesn't make much sense for Ukraine imo..

.. so instead of using those drones to repell the Russian forces in their frontyard, they send a whole bunch of them 800 km over Russian territory, unhindered of course (something which they must have expected beforehand with a huge certainty). And they took this huge risk just to potentially do some miniscule damage to some civilian targets in this gigantic city of 12 mio people, with the gain to more easily convince the Russian population to join the Russian forces against Ukraine? And I am repeating myself, instead of using them on higher value targets.

Honest question. I can't wrap my head around this.

[Alan Phipps]

I am also unconvinced so far that this was a top-level sanctioned raid conducted by the Ukraine military, but there is at least a precedent in WW2 history if it was. Again, if the Russian account is to be believed, we do not know what the drone targets actually were.

[chew-ie]

I think Whataboutism is neither a valid argument for Russia nor Ukraine but this "attack" or "not attack" (according to Russia) or whatever this incident was, just doesn't make much sense for Ukraine imo..

Maybe I phrased that point poorly (seems I have) - but this isn't a whataboutism. If Russia is to blame Ukraine for civilian deaths this is laughable at best in my opinion. As they have no problem with bombing Ukraine civilians and they also have no problem openly talking about it. So playing the victim in that point would be most inappropriate. As stated beforehand - no matter who does it, attacking civilians on purpose is never "okay".

---

About the attack itself - so far we seem to be in some kind of a "red dot phase" all parties involved in the conflict spread out and try to confuse / busy each other. Be it attacks on naval targets, small russian villages, water reservoirs, yet another cruise missile barrage or - my "favourite" one so far: moving Wagner out of Bakhmut (to do what instead ..?). Not much obvious logic - just some diversions it seems.

[felter]

I don't get this drone attack, it has led to me asking more question than answers.

If it was Ukraine, why would they do it, so far they have kept well clear from doing such a thing as it would just create problem for them. Where were the drones launched form, if it was from Ukraine how come the Russian AA didn't pick them up or even how did they travel so far without anyone noting them. If they were launched from within Russia, how has Ukraine managed to get them and the people inside Russia without the Russians noticing them. Both scenarios are not good for Russian security or intelligence and makes them look bad. If it was Ukraine where did they get those drones from as they don't look like any kind of drone they have used up to date, they looked more like the drones Russia was using a year ago. Ukraine is able to destroy tanks and bunkers, with their drones, how come they did little to no damage to those buildings, they didn't even catch fire. Putin says they did it to frighten Russian, but thanks to Russia, Ukraine knows drone attacks on civilians do not cause fear, they just cause resentment and hatred. Putin says it was a terrorist attack, does that mean Russia are agreeing that Russians are terrorist as they have attacked civilian targets in Ukraine 17 times in the last month alone.

Honestly, if I was to do an investigation into who was responsible for those drone attacks because of the lack of damage and what Putin said about them, my first suspects would not be Ukraine but Russia itself, right now that's who I think was responsible for them.

[fiksal]

My only comment - that took awhile

[clakclak]

Bakhmut revolted? Or are you refering to the russian partisan attacks in the Belgorod region?

I for one see it that way: before Ukraine is to be blaimed for any civilian casualities, Russia has to answer for their crimes against civilians. [...]

Yeh, those guys from the Belgorod region.

I think Whataboutism is neither a valid argument for Russia nor Ukraine but this "attack" or "not attack" (according to Russia) or whatever this incident was, just doesn't make much sense for Ukraine imo..

.. so instead of using those drones to repell the Russian forces in their frontyard, they send a whole bunch of them 800 km over Russian territory, unhindered of course (something which they must have expected beforehand with a huge certainty). And they took this huge risk just to potentially do some miniscule damage to some civilian targets in this gigantic city of 12 mio people, with the gain to more easily convince the Russian population to join the Russian forces against Ukraine? And I am repeating myself, instead of using them on higher value targets.

Honest question. I can't wrap my head around this.

I mean it would make a lot more sense if a group like for example BOAK was behind this. (This does not fit BOAK's modus operanti, I am just using them here as one example.) So a force that in it's goal is roughly alligned with Ukraine, without having direct connections to Ukraine or only very loose relations at best.

[mr.WHO]

Seem like there is more and more articles that push for Eurofighter Typhoon delivery.

[Falcrack]

Seem like there is more and more articles that push for Eurofighter Typhoon delivery.

The Defense Minister of Ukraine (Reznikov) made some comments about the potential transfer of Eurofighter. But I am dubious to say the least. I'll pay attention to this more when it is the Defense Minister of Germany making such comments.

[Chips]

Prof Clarke on Sky News with his views about the implication if it is indeed Ukraine behind the attacks in/on Russia, whether using Western weapons or not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6ZHx5bPEeA

[Observe]

Yea not good if Ukraine is responsible for these attacks within Russia. If Ukraine is responsible, it'll feed the narrative of a western proxy war against Russia and while true, that is a line that many do not want to admit to. As Prof Clarke pointed out, this will not look good when Ukraine comes knocking on international doors begging for more weapons. I hope Ukraine doesn't shoot themselves in the foot with this sort of thing.

It's hard to know what to think. Ukraine is known as one of the most corrupt countries on Earth, so it would be no big surprise if there is a huge chasm through which 'stolen' weapons flow into the hands of non-official groups, giving Ukraine deniability.

[felter]

Ukraine is known as one of the most corrupt countries on Earth,

I didn't know that, I know it has had its problems but the most corrupt. The UK, it also has a pretty corrupt government, even right now they are involved in some kind of cover up over the covid investigation, so corrupt governments are not too unusual.

[Observe]

Ukraine is known as one of the most corrupt countries on Earth,

I didn't know that, I know it has had its problems but the most corrupt. The UK, it also has a pretty corrupt government, even right now they are involved in some kind of cover up over the covid investigation, so corrupt governments are not too unusual.

There are plenty of references to rife corruption within Ukraine. Bribery and graft are common complaints. This is an expressed concern for NATO membership and Zelensky has promised to make improvements. As I recall, he has already fired numerous government officials for offenses in this area, but fighting a culture of corruption while at war with Russia, may be a stretch.

[fiksal]

Ukraine is known as one of the most corrupt countries on Earth,

I didn't know that, I know it has had its problems but the most corrupt. The UK, it also has a pretty corrupt government, even right now they are involved in some kind of cover up over the covid investigation, so corrupt governments are not too unusual.

possibly in that similar to Russia, where corruption is synonymous with just good sense

[felter]

It's not that there is corruption but the most corrupt on earth is most certainly debatable, there are a few countries out there that make Ukraine look like amateurs when it comes to corruption.

[Observe]

It's not that there is corruption but the most corrupt on earth is most certainly debatable, there are a few countries out there that make Ukraine look like amateurs when it comes to corruption.

I said one of the most corrupt. Not the most. Probably the most in Europe though. Anyway, this is not to condemn them, it is only to suggest that systemic internal corruption may have played a role in supplying weapons that have been used to attack Russia.

As fiskal pointed out, 'corruption is synonymous with just good sense'. Possibly this is more ingrained in some societies more than others.