How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[DesertFox]

27 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

The Doolittle Raid didn't make much sense and did negligible damage but it rattled the Japanese public. I sense that this was done for a similar reason.

True. Alternatively think about what Putin needs to have support for full mobilisation. Does this "raid" help him or doesn´t it? We will see.

[Butschi]

3 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Russia is regime based on political passivity of its citizens as main Kremlin resource, with superiority complexes adequate to its size and history heavily dwelling on triumphant propaganda

Sounds plausible but the same was true for Nazi Germany. The regime did everything it could to allow civilians at home to live a normal life. The allies argued that bombing German cities would make the people revolt against their leaders. It never worked. And it never worked that way in any other bombing campaign on civilians, so far. US bombs killed a staggering fourth of the North Korean civilian population.

The best outcome is apathy the worst more hatred and determination. Because domestic propaganda is always closer and therefore more capable to spin it the right way than foreign propaganda and because having people you care for killed usually makes you resent the people who killed them more than the ones who didn't prevent it or were responsible for the mess. People don't think that abstract.

[Butschi]

36 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

The Doolittle Raid didn't make much sense and did negligible damage but it rattled the Japanese public. I sense that this was done for a similar reason.

Is there proof of that? It boosted US morale, sure, but did it have a measurable impact on Japanese morale?

[Kinophile]

13 minutes ago, Holien said:

For FA effect on the public and absolutely pointless. We have numerous posts saying why bombing Civies and cities in Ukraine are counter productive to Russia. 

Unless Ukraine had specific military targets of worth in Moscow then imo they would be better to focus on less defended military targets. Russian military Planes sat on runways perhaps?

Doolittle was first and foremost for domestic consumption. 

Ref Moscow,  drone attacks do more than damage things- they threaten and require significant AA/AD to properly counter. 

A Pantsir in Moscow is a Pantsir not in Ukraine.

Keep up drone attacks of random intensity and scale and the Kremlin will layer yet more assets around it. 

[Pete Wenman]

Made me smile

[Beleg85]

13 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Sounds plausible but the same was true for Nazi Germany. The regime did everything it could to allow civilians at home to live a normal life. The allies argued that bombing German cities would make the people revolt against their leaders. It never worked. And it never worked that way in any other bombing campaign on civilians, so far. US bombs killed a staggering fourth of the North Korean civilian population.

The best outcome is apathy the worst more hatred and determination. Because domestic propaganda is always closer and therefore more capable to spin it the right way than foreign propaganda and because having people you care for killed usually makes you resent the people who killed them more than the ones who didn't prevent it or were responsible for the mess. People don't think that abstract.

That's why I mentioned "if measured". And you are right about protracted strategic action of bombing cities, like the one undertaken by Russians. Which is totally different thing than campaign aimed at regime and propaganda cohesiveness to, to quote specialist here, cause uncertainity and doubt on their part. They may also be forced to move some AA assets to defend its massive country.

We will see how often situation will repeat.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Beleg85

[sross112]

5 hours ago, Holien said:

I hope Ukraine is targeting military targets in Moscow as otherwise it is a pointless exercise and could weaken support.

Surely they would have been better deployed against the forces launching attacks on Ukraine. But until we know the targets in Moscow I guess it is just a feeling of unease that Ukraine is wasting precious military strike capability.

I see it as part of the shaping operations, a lot like the Russian invasion of Russia. Ukraine has struggled all along to defeat the missile strikes and drone strikes against their cities and has had to deploy significant air defenses around population areas instead of military targets or in support of military units. If these drone strikes make Russia redeploy anti air assets to protect Moscow (and if I were Ukraine I'd do the same to every city in range) that further degrades protection on the military targets. I would be surprised if Ukraine was stupid enough to attack kindergartens and hospitals, but there are plentiful legitimate targets (think transportation and logistics) in Moscow or any other large city. 

We have said from early on that Russia doesn't have sufficient assets to properly man the front line. These ops against Russian territory give the Kremlin more tough choices. Spread resources even thinner to protect everything to give their citizens piece of mind, or don't and watch the nats and sooner or later other citizens start howling that their government can't protect them. It is good strategy and puts the Kremlin between a rock and a hard place.

[FancyCat]

As for shifting Russian public opinion in favor of "total war" against Ukraine, well if 100k dead don't cause strikes or protests against war in Ukraine, then I fail to see the point in refraining from actions that will anger Russians or be used to generate support for war weighed against other considerations.

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

Budanov in the last two days said he would retaliate for Russian strikes on Kyiv. Of course Ukraine did this and the attack on the Kremlin was proof of concept. Some of the drones have already been identified as UJ-22's. 

My thesis has been for a while that the war on the Russian side has become primarily about retaining or gaining power in Moscow. This is nothing more or less than a Ukraine shaping operation on that front.

 

26 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Doolittle was first and foremost for domestic consumption. 

Ref Moscow,  drone attacks do more than damage things- they threaten and require significant AA/AD to properly counter. 

A Pantsir in Moscow is a Pantsir not in Ukraine.

Keep up drone attacks of random intensity and scale and the Kremlin will layer yet more assets around it. 

 

11 minutes ago, sross112 said:

I see it as part of the shaping operations, a lot like the Russian invasion of Russia. Ukraine has struggled all along to defeat the missile strikes and drone strikes against their cities and has had to deploy significant air defenses around population areas instead of military targets or in support of military units. If these drone strikes make Russia redeploy anti air assets to protect Moscow (and if I were Ukraine I'd do the same to every city in range) that further degrades protection on the military targets. I would be surprised if Ukraine was stupid enough to attack kindergartens and hospitals, but there are plentiful legitimate targets (think transportation and logistics) in Moscow or any other large city. 

We have said from early on that Russia doesn't have sufficient assets to properly man the front line. These ops against Russian territory give the Kremlin more tough choices. Spread resources even thinner to protect everything to give their citizens piece of mind, or don't and watch the nats and sooner or later other citizens start howling that their government can't protect them. It is good strategy and puts the Kremlin between a rock and a hard place.

I mean as far as military targets, just aim them at either the Ministry of defense building, any rail infrastructure, or oil tanks. Oi tank burn and the smoke is visible for approximately forever, their is real propaganda value in that in a city that was promised a quick and painless victory. The value of both requiring Russia to to park Pantsirs all over Moscow, and simply pointing out to Russians in the only city that matters that the SMO is not going to plan is not zero.

[Butschi]

12 minutes ago, sross112 said:

sooner or later other citizens start howling that their government can't protect them. It is good strategy and puts the Kremlin between a rock and a hard place.

As I said above, when did that ever work? It all sounds so plausible on (electronic) paper but the effect could just as well be the opposite or none at all.

Isn't the story told in Russia that their brave sons, husbands and brothers are fighting a just war against Ukrainian Nazis and evil NATO who want to destroy Russia, the last home of faithful? And now Ukraine bombs innocent civilians, of course ordered to do so and supported by the USA, UK and Germany, who are known to bomb civilians in every of their wars? You don't have to be Göbbels to spin something convincing out of that.

[kevinkin]

https://www.army-technology.com/comment/the-radio-emission-problem-and-how-to-solve-it/

Not a lot of detail but an interesting way to look at today's battlefield.

The radio risk
A crucial part of a soldier’s kit, radios have advanced their capabilities and greatly contribute to mission success. However, such enhancements have also brought with them a heightened risk of being detected.

Indeed, radio frequency (RF) signature is emerging as an increasingly reliable means of detecting, observing and tracking the movement of troops.

This is because RF signatures can be picked up in almost any situation – day, night, in trees, while dug-in, in buildings, under cover, and in bad weather. Conversely, visual methods of tracking can be countered by being under cover and are hampered by extreme weather conditions, while thermal systems will not pick up signals of troops hiding in buildings.

[akd]

Effects on targets achieved:

 

[FancyCat]

6 minutes ago, Butschi said:

As I said above, when did that ever work? It all sounds so plausible on (electronic) paper but the effect could just as well be the opposite or none at all.

Isn't the story told in Russia that their brave sons, husbands and brothers are fighting a just war against Ukrainian Nazis and evil NATO who want to destroy Russia, the last home of faithful? And now Ukraine bombs innocent civilians, of course ordered to do so and supported by the USA, UK and Germany, who are known to bomb civilians in every of their wars? You don't have to be Göbbels to spin something convincing out of that.

A million Russians fled pre-mobilization, I don't think that signifes the Russian population is completely under the thrall of Putin. The reluctance to mobilize, now and for the first wave also indicate that Putin fears mobilization and its effects on Russia.

This indicates that Russia wants to downplay it, not play it up for mobilization imo.

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

38 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Sounds plausible but the same was true for Nazi Germany. The regime did everything it could to allow civilians at home to live a normal life. The allies argued that bombing German cities would make the people revolt against their leaders. It never worked. And it never worked that way in any other bombing campaign on civilians, so far. US bombs killed a staggering fourth of the North Korean civilian population.

You have correctly identified why it didn't work in the past.  A unified population, either voluntarily (like British and Ukrainian civilians) or through brainwashing/fear (WW2 Germany or North Korea), will not be shaken by such attacks.  If anything, it will reinforce their unity.

This is *not* the case in Russia.  The population is fractured and under great stress.  The political apparatus governing them is also becoming more obviously in turmoil with various factions undermining each other.  The common element is the war is not going well and both the population and the power blocs know it.

A better example to look at is Serbia being bombed to stop the war in Kosovo.  It worked because the conditions within Serbia were precarious.  The Serbian power structure understood that the population was not going to support mass murder in Kosovo at the expense of their own lives and comfort.

38 minutes ago, Butschi said:

The best outcome is apathy the worst more hatred and determination. Because domestic propaganda is always closer and therefore more capable to spin it the right way than foreign propaganda and because having people you care for killed usually makes you resent the people who killed them more than the ones who didn't prevent it or were responsible for the mess. People don't think that abstract.

This could be true, but it is not what is likely in this case.  Ukraine is never going to do a widespread or large scale campaign, therefore the amount of death and destruction will be minimal.  The major thing the population is going to experience is the sense that they are vulnerable, not grieving for the dead.

The thinking is that the majority of the affluent/educated Russians are more apathetic than supportive.  They are the ones that the various power blocs have to be the most concerned about as we're talking about major metro areas like St. Petersburg and Moscow.  Whatever passive or active opposition there might be is located in these areas.

Besides from the domestic morale boost to Ukraine, these attacks are likely a message to the affluent/educated that things can get worse than losing their jobs or not being able to vacation in Spain.  If it is managed correctly this group will make noise in a way that the power blocs will respond in some way that is not good for Putin's regime.

In short, Ukraine is attempting to do delicate surgery on the Russian political system, not brute force terror like what Russia and previous bombing campaigns have done.  It's a big difference.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

16 minutes ago, Butschi said:

As I said above, when did that ever work? It all sounds so plausible on (electronic) paper but the effect could just as well be the opposite or none at all.

We cross posted... Serbia's war on Kosovo is one of the few examples out there, but it is also one that is most applicable to what is going on now.  In fact, the average Russian probably has even less interest in losing their lives and comfort over Ukraine than Serbians over Kosovo.  Which is why Putin has been trying to convince Russians that NATO is trying to wipe Russia off the map because the "Ukraine is Russian" reasoning hasn't shown much resonance.

Steve

[Beleg85]

32 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Isn't the story told in Russia that their brave sons, husbands and brothers are fighting a just war against Ukrainian Nazis and evil NATO who want to destroy Russia, the last home of faithful? And now Ukraine bombs innocent civilians, of course ordered to do so and supported by the USA, UK and Germany, who are known to bomb civilians in every of their wars? You don't have to be Göbbels to spin something convincing out of that.

There is also significant regional differences you miss. Russian TG's now are littered with shadenfreude posts from other parts of Russia towards Moscow, which was untouched by now, nor by danger nor mobilization. Add that many hits are concentrated in Western part of city, near famous Ryublovka district...inhabited by many of regime officials and  nouvau riches, who habitually live a life like war is non existent. Many Russians seem to partially love idea behind this strike.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Beleg85

[Bearstronaut]

1 hour ago, Butschi said:

Is there proof of that? It boosted US morale, sure, but did it have a measurable impact on Japanese morale?

Yamamoto's obsession with the US carrier force after the raid led to the badly planned Midway operation and the destruction of most of the Kido Butai.

[sross112]

31 minutes ago, Butschi said:

As I said above, when did that ever work? It all sounds so plausible on (electronic) paper but the effect could just as well be the opposite or none at all.

Isn't the story told in Russia that their brave sons, husbands and brothers are fighting a just war against Ukrainian Nazis and evil NATO who want to destroy Russia, the last home of faithful? And now Ukraine bombs innocent civilians, of course ordered to do so and supported by the USA, UK and Germany, who are known to bomb civilians in every of their wars? You don't have to be Göbbels to spin something convincing out of that.

Did they bomb innocent civilians? I haven't seen anything released on what was targeted yet. As I said before I believe Ukraine would only target transport and logistics or actual military targets. 

I am not thinking that the civilian population will rise up and demand the end of the war. I am saying that it will add a lot of internal friction and degrade the internal messaging. A lot like the strikes on the airfields a few months ago that got all the "What air defense doing?" memes going. It undermines the false narrative that the Russian state and military are all powerful. It rubs it in everyone's face that Putin's 3 day SMO and all the rhetoric from the state media is a steaming ***t sandwich. 

To me it is a lot more messaging aimed at Putin and the Kremlin and battlefield shaping by forcing decisions on asset allocation. If you send those ten drones against military targets in the Donbas and manage to take out three vehicles, yay. You send those against the transportation network in Moscow and now the Kremlin needs to pull a couple dozen AA systems out of the Donbas to cover the capitol. That is a bigger pay off and a smarter use of the drones.  

[Butschi]

6 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

Yamamoto's obsession with the US carrier force after the raid led to the badly planned Midway operation and the destruction of most of the Kido Butai.

I was referring to your statement about how the Dolittle raid "rattled the Japanese public", though, not Yamamoto.

[kimbosbread]

44 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

https://www.army-technology.com/comment/the-radio-emission-problem-and-how-to-solve-it/

Not a lot of detail but an interesting way to look at today's battlefield.

The radio risk
A crucial part of a soldier’s kit, radios have advanced their capabilities and greatly contribute to mission success. However, such enhancements have also brought with them a heightened risk of being detected.

Indeed, radio frequency (RF) signature is emerging as an increasingly reliable means of detecting, observing and tracking the movement of troops.

This is because RF signatures can be picked up in almost any situation – day, night, in trees, while dug-in, in buildings, under cover, and in bad weather. Conversely, visual methods of tracking can be countered by being under cover and are hampered by extreme weather conditions, while thermal systems will not pick up signals of troops hiding in buildings.

Frequency hopping only does so much unfortunately; that’s the rationale for going for narrow-beam aimed signals. It’s a movement towards sub warfare on land, effectively. Either that or have decoys all over.

On the unmanned vehicle side, this argues for autonomous systems. 

[Butschi]

24 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Serbia's war on Kosovo is one of the few examples out there, but it is also one that is most applicable to what is going on now.

I won't argue about the success of that campaign but the discussion here was about (indiscriminately) bombing civilians - at least in my understanding. So, does this air campaign (and there is of course a number of actually successful ones that were not targeted at civilians) make for a good example here?

"After first targeting the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s air defences, NATO gradually escalated the campaign using the most advanced, precision-guided systems and avoiding civilian casualties to the greatest extent possible." (nato.int) So,

16 minutes ago, sross112 said:

Did they bomb innocent civilians?

I don't know. I was discussing more why they shouldn't than if they actually did. Hitting military targets or infrastructure critical to the war effort is a different thing, though of course propaganda may spin that, too, in a different way.

[Butschi]

32 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

There is also significant regional differences you miss. Russian TG's now are littered with shadenfreude posts from other parts of Russia towards Moscow, which was untouched by now, nor by danger nor mobilization. Add that many hits are concentrated in Western part of city, near famous Ryublovka district...inhabited by many of regime officials and  nouvau riches, who habitually live a life like war is non existent. Many Russians seem to partially love idea behind this strike.

Ok, I'll trust your expertise there but I don't really understand how schadenfreude in other parts of Russia (which is a different thing than revolutionary tendencies or similar) helps Ukraine or hurts Moscow?

[Beleg85]

29 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Ok, I'll trust your expertise there but I don't really understand how schadenfreude in other parts of Russia (which is a different thing than revolutionary tendencies or similar) helps Ukraine or hurts Moscow?

Oh, I never believed in revolutionary tendencies in Russia. It's mafia-state with imperialistic patina but effective driving philosophy of nachuism on behalf of population (that is bad word in Russian btw.), so if leader of the pack- Putin- cannot protect its minions, he has a real problem. If as a response he wants to for example announce new wave of mobilization, this time he must take notice that regions now would expect many more Muscovites to be put in the ranks. And he avoided preciselly that thourgh entire war, correctly fearing that it may pose danger to his direct power. Again, this is not totalitarian state with some cohesive ideology.

More creaks in the system. It will not break it to be sure, but humiliation is evident. Add looming and more visible recognition in population (freely expressed in internet, rarely in official ceremonies), that war is going badly and Russia simply cannot win it like it would like. It's just another stone to this garden.

As addendum: it sound paradoxial, but many polls from before the war showed that most prevalent fear in Russian society was about war. Ofc. not meaning own genocidal expedition on somebody' else turf, but war coming into Russia itself. Just saying.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Beleg85

[sburke]

Russia terror bombs Ukraine for over a year

 

 

Moscow gets hit by a handful of small drones causing limited damage and no reported casualties. 

OMFG don't they know the allied terror bombings were a failure!!!

 

[MOS:96B2P]

1 hour ago, sross112 said:

Did they bomb innocent civilians? I haven't seen anything released on what was targeted yet. As I said before I believe Ukraine would only target transport and logistics or actual military targets. 

THIS!! The conversation has partially evolved into why Ukraine intentionally attacked civilians and if their attack on civilians is a good idea or not.  

The Ukrainians probably attempted to attack military, logistic targets in the Moscow area. If there was any collateral damage and civilian deaths in residential areas it was probably unintended.  This seems like a basic reasonable assumption to start with. At least until there is reliable evidence to the contrary.