How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[panzermartin]

All alive and well? I wonder where that ISIS announcement came from. This doesn't look like suicidal ISIS at all. 

[panzermartin]

16 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This is clearly a security failure so pinning it on a war opponent makes that opponent look competent and effective.  This is counter narratives of “we are winning in Ukraine” which they have been continually pushing

How about the other way. "Look we have bravely fought them and flattened them in the battlefield and now they are only capable of cowardly sneaky terror attacks massacring undefended youth. These are the acts of the desperate and the defeated "

(Buuut if we mobilize some more of you, the country will be a safe invincible fort ) . 

[ASL Veteran]

10 hours ago, FancyCat said:

No offense but assuming you got the info from https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=60622

The picture is not exactly imports bad.

From the same link, right under your quote:

Edit: just realized I didn't find your quote in the link. Regardless imports of crude oil does not necessarily mean a rise in oil pricing is wholly negative for the U.S.

 

Without tossing various names into the discussion and whether the US is exporting or importing here is what the CEIC says the US was producing since 2011.  If you select the 'Max' button you can see what the US has been producing since 1960.  This is also a discussion that drives up the blood pressure of certain forum contributors so best to move on to something else if we want another game created.  

US Crude Oil: Production, 1960 – 2023 | CEIC Data

 

[pintere]

8 hours ago, dan/california said:

Verstka reported that employees of the military recruitment center in Moscow indicated that the pace of Russian voluntary recruitment “dropped sharply” starting in October 2023 with the number of visitors to the Unified Contract Hiring Center in Moscow decreasing from 500-600 per day to 20-30 per day.

This is just a theory, but I wonder if the various persons in Russia are a lot more willing to go to Ukraine on the assumption that they’ll be employed in defensive rather than offensive operations?

I know I’d way rather sit in a trench on same quiet patch of frontline as opposed to being crushed by the treads of my own armoured vehicles in the open…

[omae2]

33 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I think this one is far trickier than first glance.  If Putin spins this as somehow a US/Ukrainian operation then he looks weak and incompetent.  This was downtown Moscow, not some outer berg.  This is clearly a security failure so pinning it on a war opponent makes that opponent look competent and effective.  This is counter narratives of “we are winning in Ukraine” which they have been continually pushing.  So while it may drive support into Putin’s arms for the war, it may very well create a lot of doubt as to his ability to protect Russian in this war.  

In fact a terror attack is just about the worst false flag op to run here.  A massive explosion complete with ATACMs debris along with dozens of others “shot down” makes far more sense.  An asymmetric terror attack by a few armed gunman simply looks and feels like bad housekeeping and a massive intel failure, no matter how hard one tries to spin it.

I have no doubt they will link this back to Ukraine, but already here this is a soft link. “Ukraine was providing haven, but did not mastermind the whole thing.”  I am sure the real wingnuts will come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories but in the end Putin cannot lay this entirety at the feet of Ukraine without making Ukraine look much scarier and effective.  So what will be interesting is whether or not he does.  If he does, then things are likely worse internally for Russia than we can see.  He is willing to take the risk of making Ukraine look like they “got in a good one” because support is seriously flagging and he needs to leverage this any way he can.  If they downplay and sidestep, things might be tighter and more stable  because Putin is not entirely backed into a corner.

Putin has already called Ukraine “Nazi-terrorists” it was his entire excuse for the war.  Demonstrating of given credence to just how effective Ukraine still is at being as such, after two years of war, really runs counter to the entire Russian narrative thus far.

This is where cultural differences come into play. You thinking like a westerner that has to be consistent in what hes saying. You don't get that this isn't the case in russia. The bigger the confusion the bigger the control. This is why i say that they will make twist on this that in the end will make no sense. Cause if its make no sense you will only remember the calling words. Ukraine was involved, and the feeling you should have that is hate. Every aspect of russian propaganda is based on building down rationality and enforcing emotional response. They aware that its hard influence rational peoples so they don't need them. They need instinct driven animals.

It does not matter that it was a fault of their home defense service. Cause they will not be held responsible.

The other thing is the narrative. It does not matter.  really don't want to come with cliches but in 1984 there is a scene where they have the two minutes of hate. You know the story in the first part of the two minutes they saying one thing and in the end they say the exact opposite. Its true today as well. There are some peoples in the russian society that can have individual opinion and some influence but usually they are far away in Ukraine. Those back home are don't have influence or first hand experience to know what its true. Its an alternative reality. So it does not matter if the narrative does not fit the picture, only that it push the right button on the primitive parts of the human brain.

[The_Capt]

20 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

How about the other way. "Look we have bravely fought them and flattened them in the battlefield and now they are only capable of cowardly sneaky terror attacks massacring undefended youth. These are the acts of the desperate and the defeated "

(Buuut if we mobilize some more of you, the country will be a safe invincible fort ) . 

Maybe, but Russia has already had a lot of opportunities to play that card.  Instead we get "industrial accidents," "airplane malfunctions" and Priggy "miscommunications."  Putin has been downplaying and sidestepping stuff exploding all over Russia for two years.  Why suddenly wake up after winning a fake election and go "you know what, lets try for a Russian 9/11, now"?

 

[ASL Veteran]

52 minutes ago, Sgt Joch said:

https://www.politico.eu/article/energy-infrastructure-target-attack-ukraine-russia-war/

Another article that apparently the Biden Admin is asking Ukraine to stop targeting Russian Oil infrastructure.

Since the whole focus now is on the election, the cynic in me thinks Biden is worried that if this causes Oil prices to go up, it will increase the chances Trump gets elected.

Whether oil prices are / will be affected or not isn't really known at this time.  Even the activity of the Houthis could be having an impact and / or it's also possible that this type of activity is already baked into the price (commodities traders are going to anticipate stuff and price it into the Bid Ask spread if oil has a spread - I'm pretty confident that it does, but it's not exactly easy to pull up an actual trading price online).  I can't imagine that the current administration would go this route for that reason unless it was already having a discernable impact and that impact was having an obvious effect on the electorate.  No, I actually don't think you are being cynical enough!  I think I'll leave it there though cause we really don't want to be having that discussion I think lol.

 

Edited March 23 by ASL Veteran

[The_Capt]

11 minutes ago, omae2 said:

This is where cultural differences come into play. You thinking like a westerner that has to be consistent in what hes saying. You don't get that this isn't the case in russia. The bigger the confusion the bigger the control. This is why i say that they will make twist on this that in the end will make no sense. Cause if its make no sense you will only remember the calling words. Ukraine was involved, and the feeling you should have that is hate. Every aspect of russian propaganda is based on building down rationality and enforcing emotional response. They aware that its hard influence rational peoples so they don't need them. They need instinct driven animals.

It does not matter that it was a fault of their home defense service. Cause they will not be held responsible.

The other thing is the narrative. It does not matter.  really don't want to come with cliches but in 1984 there is a scene where they have the two minutes of hate. You know the story in the first part of the two minutes they saying one thing and in the end they say the exact opposite. Its true today as well. There are some peoples in the russian society that can have individual opinion and some influence but usually they are far away in Ukraine. Those back home are don't have influence or first hand experience to know what its true. Its an alternative reality. So it does not matter if the narrative does not fit the picture, only that it push the right button on the primitive parts of the human brain.

Then why not exploit all of the other splodey stuff that has been happening for two years in the same manner?  They haven't.  They have been downplaying internal insecurity and writing it off to smoking accidents.  If Putin wanted "more control through chaos...because 'Russia'"  1) why wait until after the sham election?  and 2) why down play a string of deep attacks inside Russia up until now.

Not buying it.  Either something has changed, or this too will get sidestepped.

In fact this entire narrative is contradictory:  "Russians as sheeple who will do whatever they are told." but "Putin needs to run a major false flag to get support for mobilization."  If all Russians are a bunch of bloodthirsty killbots who just do what they are told...then why go through the freakin theatre?  Just mobilize and go all in?

No. I am not buying the "ah, poor western mindset...you just don't get X."  It gets tossed out way too often and never lands anywhere.  Russians are human beings who live in a different cultural and political paradigm, but we have seen behaviors that are consistent with divided political will and Putin having to balance realities.  To suddenly deliberately throw in a major (successful) terror attack into that mix does not make a lot of sense unless conditions have changed.

 

Edited March 23 by The_Capt

[Offshoot]

1 minute ago, The_Capt said:

Then why not exploit all of the other splodey stuff that has been happening for two years in the same manner.

A possible explanation is that Putin was holding off until after the election. Many posts have been written here about the societal effects of a mobilization and the negative political impacts. Now Putin is secure, an emotional attack on Russia helps to underwrite the patriotic mobilisation.

[panzermartin]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Maybe, but Russia has already had a lot of opportunities to play that card.  Instead we get "industrial accidents," "airplane malfunctions" and Priggy "miscommunications."  Putin has been downplaying and sidestepping stuff exploding all over Russia for two years.  Why suddenly wake up after winning a fake election and go "you know what, lets try for a Russian 9/11, now"?

 

I dont think that the refinery attacks are on par with this shocking attack that has definetely terrified muscovites, even on the zombier side. Moscow people were the less involved and interested in this war (and the most opposed to this war). This could accelerate a lot of changes in the security/military apparatus and mobilization. 

Now it was the worst time, because they recently changed status from spezial militarski operationski to great patriotic war. And because all signs are that war is getting broader with Macron announcing intention to send troops etc which is a new major shift in the Western involvment. 

 

[Beleg85]

59 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

I went and looked up some of the place names of the location, they all resemble government offices of quite mundane nature.

Perhaps Nexta fooked again then. Broke own rules of not posting those populists, heh.

 

And we have official version with Chief himself: at the Ukrainian border "window" was opened to harbour terrorist.

https://twitter.com/SomeGumul/status/1771520671559905664

[omae2]

11 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Then why not exploit all of the other splodey stuff that has been happening for two years in the same manner?  They haven't.  They have been downplaying internal insecurity and writing it off to smoking accidents.  If Putin wanted "more control through chaos...because 'Russia'"  1) why wait until after the sham election?  and 2) why down play a string of deep attacks inside Russia up until now.

Not buying it.  Either something has changed, or this too will get sidestepped.

In fact this entire narrative is contradictory:  "Russians as sheeple who will do whatever they are told." but "Putin needs to run a major false flag to get support for mobilization."  If all Russians are a bunch of bloodthirsty killbots who just do what they are told...then why go through the freakin theatre?  Just mobilize and go all in?

No. I am not buying the "ah, poor western mindset...you just don't get X."  It gets tossed out way too often and never lands anywhere.  Russians are human beings who live in a different cultural and political paradigm, but we have seen behaviors that are consistent with divided political will and Putin having to balance realities.  To suddenly deliberately throw in a major (successful) terror attack into that mix does not make a lot of sense unless conditions have changed.

 

Whats the emotional reaction to when the countries air defense cannot defeat attacks? Fear and mistrust. Whats the emotional response to five guys going in and killing a bunch of unarmed civilian at a concert? Fear and Hate. One is an act of war the other is terrorism. Its disgusting even for those that hate the russians. So that's you number 2.

Number 1: Because this is what gives legitimacy to the whole thing. You know and i know that this election was a joke, but not russians. They might doubt it, or they might know that it was not really an election at all, but its the law. They have legitimate power for the next what? Six year?
So everybody should do as they say cause they have a legitimate power. If they don't they do that's a crime. It's that simple.

Like is it surprise to you that know they start to speak about the "SMO" like war? Or that they will create 8 new brigade? No it was obvious 2 months ago. I know it, you know it, they know it. Did the russians know it? Some might but most people don't care about this things like the ones that are playing CM. They just living their life and all that **** is just a back noise. Average peoples don't know **** about politic and war. This why things work like they do.

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, panzermartin said:

I dont think that the refinery attacks are on par with this shocking attack that has definetely terrified muscovites, even on the zombier side. Moscow people were the less involved and interested in this war (and the most opposed to this war). This could accelerate a lot of changes in the security/military apparatus and mobilization. 

Now it was the worst time, because they recently changed status from spezial militarski operationski to great patriotic war. And because all signs are that war is getting broader with Macron announcing intention to send troops etc which is a new major shift in the Western involvment. 

 

Again, not sure why he needs something this dramatic. The Moscovites were all "one side" according to posters here, so why kill a bunch to make them "more onside?"  Further, we know that Russia has been pulling from rural areas largely disconnected from Moscow.  A bunch of illiterate poor sods who barely understand what is going on.  How is an attack in Moscow going to make them suddenly care more about this war?

An attack on Moscow also demonstrates weakness.  So if moscovites are weak on this war, a terror attack is likely a poor way to shift mindsets.  In fact, Steve's theory of "why ISIL" conducted this attack in the first place has far more traction - they sensed the divisions and weakness and exploited it.

These are the inconsistencies that I can see:

- Russians are a homogeneous mass of sheeple who all hate Ukraine  - but Putin is having trouble selling mass mobilization.

- Putin needs chaos to drive divided support for this war into his skinny little arms - so he picks a major terror attack at the heart of Russian power and then has to Rube Goldberg it back to Ukraine...and not make Ukraine look like a mastermind while doing so.  

- Putin has already had plenty of opportunity to declare full on casus belli; how do you think we would respond to a Russian drone strike on Poland?  How about 50 drone strikes?  But he needs to somehow make up a dramatic terror attack to go "all in"...after he already has said that he is "going all in."?  All those refinery strikes and A-50s were not enough.  The freaking Russian Legion was not enough...but Russians are all sheeple how basically respond however Putin wants....seriously?

- A terror attack is the worst way to go about this if Russian society is divided.  It is too grey.  It leaves too many doubts on the table.  If this was truly a chaos operation one needs to be able to pull undeniable truth from it.  A terror attack like this is one of the worst ways to go about that.  An unambiguous conventional escalation by the west makes for a far better mechanism to create war support and unity...it would be why we have been avoiding these sorts of actions.

Vague handwaving and head-patting (poor westerners, you simply do not understand Russian mindset) is disingenuous as I have yet to hear one theory that actually holds water from those doing the head -patting.  We basically get "well because...Russia".  Or some dehumanizing nonsense.

If this is a false flag, or the Russians make a lot of hay out of it - we are seeing a shift in behavior.  A shift that is happening for a reason.  And I am not sure that reason is to somehow erase resistance to mobilization through a muddy asymmetric attack - that, is western-centric thinking because it is what we did last time it happened to us.  

[The_Capt]

16 minutes ago, omae2 said:

Whats the emotional reaction to when the countries air defense cannot defeat attacks? Fear and mistrust. Whats the emotional response to five guys going in and killing a bunch of unarmed civilian at a concert? Fear and Hate. One is an act of war the other is terrorism. Its disgusting even for those that hate the russians. So that's you number 2.

Number 1: Because this is what gives legitimacy to the whole thing. You know and i know that this election was a joke, but not russians. They might doubt it, or they might know that it was not really an election at all, but its the law. They have legitimate power for the next what? Six year?
So everybody should do as they say cause they have a legitimate power. If they don't they do that's a crime. It's that simple.

Like is it surprise to you that know they start to speak about the "SMO" like war? Or that they will create 8 new brigade? No it was obvious 2 months ago. I know it, you know it, they know it. Did the russians know it? Some might but most people don't care about this things like the ones that are playing CM. They just living their life and all that **** is just a back noise. Average peoples don't know **** about politic and war. This why things work like they do.

This theory holds basically zero water.  So the fact that Putin has been framing almost every Ukrainian deep strike action as "terrorism" since Day 1 was not enough?  He needed to stage or let a "real terror attack happen" to get "average peoples [who] don't know **** about politics and war" onside?  He already freakin had that according to "experts" on this forum because Russians are all sheeple who massively voted in favor of him.  Posters here who live in the region declared loudly that "all Russians really support Putin and the election shows it."  But now Putin needs to stage a terror attack to...do...what, exactly?

Oh wait, Putin didn't have massive support for this war - even though he got massive support in the election - and needs to stage a terror attack to drive it into his arms because all that other stuff was not enough?  If Russian's are that micro-social centric then 200 people getting killed in downtown Moscow is not going to change that.  In fact, as we have been told repeatedly, Russians simply do not care about each other: widows dancing on RA soldiers graves, mothers offering up sons, Moscow not giving two ****'s about rural Russia and vice versa.  So now a single shoot out at a concert in Moscow is going to override all that "who gives a f#ckery?"

I am sorry but this is all sucking and blowing at the same time.  We can stop this crap right now.  In reality this was very likely a terror attack by a known VEO, that US intel picked up ahead of time.  Russian distrust and dysfunction created conditions for a security failure.   Now if we want to have a real discussion on the event let's focus on the real questions:

- Why did ISIL-K do this now?

- How is Putin going to spin it and why?  Because I strongly suspect he got caught off-guard as well. 

Any bizarre conspiracy theories on "false-flags" and/or "crisis actors" can go in the bin with "bio-black sites" until someone can come up with any real proof.

 

[panzermartin]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Again, not sure why he needs something this dramatic. The Moscovites were all "one side" according to posters here, so why kill a bunch to make them "more onside?"  Further, we know that Russia has been pulling from rural areas largely disconnected from Moscow.  A bunch of illiterate poor sods who barely understand what is going on.  How is an attack in Moscow going to make them suddenly care more about this war?

An attack on Moscow also demonstrates weakness.  So if moscovites are weak on this war, a terror attack is likely a poor way to shift mindsets.  In fact, Steve's theory of "why ISIL" conducted this attack in the first place has far more traction - they sensed the divisions and weakness and exploited it.

These are the inconsistencies that I can see:

- Russians are a homogeneous mass of sheeple who all hate Ukraine  - but Putin is having trouble selling mass mobilization.

- Putin needs chaos to drive divided support for this war into his skinny little arms - so he picks a major terror attack at the heart of Russian power and then has to Rube Goldberg it back to Ukraine...and not make Ukraine look like a mastermind while doing so.  

- Putin has already had plenty of opportunity to declare full on casus belli; how do you think we would respond to a Russian drone strike on Poland?  How about 50 drone strikes?  But he needs to somehow make up a dramatic terror attack to go "all in"...after he already has said that he is "going all in."?  All those refinery strikes and A-50s were not enough.  The freaking Russian Legion was not enough...but Russians are all sheeple how basically respond however Putin wants....seriously?

- A terror attack is the worst way to go about this if Russian society is divided.  It is too grey.  It leaves too many doubts on the table.  If this was truly a chaos operation one needs to be able to pull undeniable truth from it.  A terror attack like this is one of the worst ways to go about that.  An unambiguous conventional escalation by the west makes for a far better mechanism to create war support and unity...it would be why we have been avoiding these sorts of actions.

Vague handwaving and head-patting (poor westerners, you simply do not understand Russian mindset) is disingenuous as I have yet to hear one theory that actually holds water from those doing the head -patting.  We basically get "well because...Russia".  Or some dehumanizing nonsense.

If this is a false flag, or the Russians make a lot of hay out of it - we are seeing a shift in behavior.  A shift that is happening for a reason.  And I am not sure that reason is to somehow erase resistance to mobilization through a muddy asymmetric attack - that, is western-centric thinking because it is what we did last time it happened to us.  

I'm not saying Putin did this. I don't believe it. A massive drone attack in live TV on some football field crowd would look more impressive than this "grey" random attack.

Could be some rogue anti-russian team , could be pro UKR chechens , who knows. I don't think this is ISIS. I think by now the islamic state has been reduced to a teenager in a cave with a PC that sends announcments trying to claim the paternity of random attacks. Well not that much maybe, but I don't see why they would go that far after years of silence and even take sides and get involved in a West vs Russia war, because that's how it looks now. 

Whoever was, the intention was to put more fire under the cauldron. The timing was right. Maybe FSB had some hints but didnt bother much as you say...

The consequences of the attack will be evident in the coming weeks/months. Already Putin is blaming Ukraine on national broadcast... 

 

 

[omae2]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This theory holds basically zero water.  So the fact that Putin has been framing almost every Ukrainian deep strike action as "terrorism" since Day 1 was not enough?  He needed to stage or let a "real terror attack happen" to get "average peoples [who] don't know **** about politics and war" onside?  He already freakin had that according to "experts" on this forum because Russians are all sheeple who massively voted in favor of him.  Posters here who live in the region declared loudly that "all Russians really support Putin and the election shows it."  But now Putin needs to stage a terror attack to...do...what, exactly?

Oh wait, Putin didn't have massive support for this war - even though he got massive support in the election - and needs to stage a terror attack to drive it into his arms because all that other stuff was not enough?  If Russian's are that micro-social centric then 200 people getting killed in downtown Moscow is not going to change that.  In fact, as we have been told repeatedly, Russians simply do not care about each other: widows dancing on RA soldiers graves, mothers offering up sons, Moscow not giving two ****'s about rural Russia and vice versa.  So now a single shoot out at a concert in Moscow is going to override all that "who gives a f#ckery?"

I am sorry but this is all sucking and blowing at the same time.  We can stop this crap right now.  In reality this was very likely a terror attack by a known VEO, that US intel picked up ahead of time.  Russian distrust and dysfunction created conditions for a security failure.   Now if we want to have a real discussion on the event let's focus on the real questions:

- Why did ISIL-K do this now?

- How is Putin going to spin it and why?  Because I strongly suspect he got caught off-guard as well. 

Any bizarre conspiracy theories on "false-flags" and/or "crisis actors" can go in the bin with "bio-black sites" until someone can come up with any real proof.

 

Suit yourself if you feel that way. But for your rhetorical questions:

"But now Putin needs to stage a terror attack to...do...what, exactly?"

Cause of mobilization. Generally nobody want to die in Ukraine, so they need a shock factor that can be of use in forcing peoples to not to flee. Is it going to do that? I dunno, but after 911 guys all over the USA runned to join up with the army. Its possible that they take it as an example.

"So now a single shoot out at a concert in Moscow is going to override all that "who gives a f#ckery?"

Oh yeah this the thing with russia, the backwater can be ignored but if you have a major terror attack in moskva than **** gonna go down. Mothers crying on the net for years now and nobody lift a finger, but lets just wait out what will happen when a bunch of moskovite get blasted in the middle of the city. I have a feeling that's its gonna be different.

So yeah im gonna stop now and concentrate on the real questions.

- Why did ISIL-K do this now? (Maybe because they were encouraged by someone.)

- How is Putin going to spin it and why? (Maybe he going to rally up hate against the Ukrainians that he will portray behind this whole fiasco. So people will not run over border from mobilization. Maybe.)

[Eddy]

22 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Why did ISIL-K do this now?

One of the speakers posits that ISIL-K did this now because they have now regrouped in Afghanistan, basically why now? because now they have the strength, whereas previously they didn't. (The link is the correct position where the ex CIA operative is talking about it).   

[billbindc]

4 hours ago, kraze said:

ISIL has nothing to do with this. It was done by FSB, which already officially blamed Ukraine for the attack because we, of course, hired ISIL to bomb putin's fans and ISIL terrorists tried to escape to Ukraine where they were promptly caught.

The sole fact that no cops or military personnel were present at Crocus for about an hour should tell you everything you need to know.

 

It is both an extraordinarily bad idea to assume that the regime's incompetence is always planned or that anyone in Russia is going to buy their bull****. Siloviks aren't magic.

[The_Capt]

39 minutes ago, omae2 said:

Cause of mobilization. Generally nobody want to die in Ukraine, so they need a shock factor that can be of use in forcing peoples to not to flee. Is it going to do that? I dunno, but after 911 guys all over the USA runned to join up with the army. Its possible that they take it as an example.

But this is exactly what you accuse western think of, western thinking.  We responded with unity across political lines to a brutal and highly visible attack.  The Russia, that you yourself describe, is not going to react with the exact same mindset.  If Russia is really a nation of insular internal apathy, then a high profile terror attack in Moscow is not going to suddenly galvanize the public into signing up in droves.  If Russians already overwhelmingly support Putin, then they should be signing up in droves regardless.

43 minutes ago, omae2 said:

Oh yeah this the thing with russia, the backwater can be ignored but if you have a major terror attack in moskva than **** gonna go down. Mothers crying on the net for years now and nobody lift a finger, but lets just wait out what will happen when a bunch of moskovite get blasted in the middle of the city. I have a feeling that's its gonna be different.

So Russians now all love Moscow?  An attack on Moscow is an attack on them all?  This is the exact opposite of what we have been told during the last year.  Further, this is not the first time Moscow has been hit.  Nor did we see massive civilian mobilization when Priggy went on his wild ride.  Basically everyone sat back and watched.

Ukrainian and other posters have worked very hard to frame Russian mindset as 1) in vast support of Putin and this war, or 2) mercenary and amoral based on Russian apathy.  Those two point are not aligned but ok, we didn’t really have another spin.  Now “Russia staged a terror attack to blame it on Ukraine so they can mobilize” which does not logically follow out of #1 or #2.

 

[The_Capt]

49 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Could be some rogue anti-russian team , could be pro UKR chechens , who knows. I don't think this is ISIS. I think by now the islamic state has been reduced to a teenager in a cave with a PC that sends announcments trying to claim the paternity of random attacks. Well not that much maybe, but I don't see why they would go that far after years of silence and even take sides and get involved in a West vs Russia war, because that's how it looks now.

ISIL has been drastically reduced but it has spun off affiliates within Afghanistan and other Stans.  It would appear that they are very active and capable.  Every major western news outlet is confirming it was IS-K backed up by western intel.  Russia is trying to toss sh#t at Ukraine right now but even they have not invented some weird “it was IS-U” yet.

The timing is odd, I will give it that.

[kimbosbread]

1 hour ago, omae2 said:

Every aspect of russian propaganda is based on building down rationality and enforcing emotional response. They aware that its hard influence rational peoples so they don't need them. They need instinct driven animals.

I think this bears repeating. RAND put out a great article a while on this; this style of propaganda is not limited just to within Russia’s borders https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html.

A decent portion of the US right has basically gone full retard partially as a result of this kind of information onslaught. And lots of other people have been affected more generally where they break down trust.

48 minutes ago, omae2 said:

Cause of mobilization. Generally nobody want to die in Ukraine, so they need a shock factor that can be of use in forcing peoples to not to flee. Is it going to do that? I dunno, but after 911 guys all over the USA runned to join up with the army. Its possible that they take it as an example.

That’s the other thing; the timing is perfect, right after the election and “declaration” of war, and pre-mobilization… and the lack of nearby security forces is suspect. Just because it is crazy and irrational from our perspective doesn’t mean it isn’t useful for Putin.

The null hypothesis of “jihadis did it” I do think makes more sense, but the alternative “putin did it” is not out of the question.

And the worst part is, it doesn’t matter. If ISIS did it, it’s just as useful for Putin.

[billbindc]

9 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

But this is exactly what you accuse western think of, western thinking.  We responded with unity across political lines to a brutal and highly visible attack.  The Russia, that you yourself describe, is not going to react with the exact same mindset.  If Russia is really a nation of insular internal apathy, then a high profile terror attack in Moscow is not going to suddenly galvanize the public into signing up in droves.  If Russians already overwhelmingly support Putin, then they should be signing up in droves regardless.

So Russians now all love Moscow?  An attack on Moscow is an attack on them all?  This is the exact opposite of what we have been told during the last year.  Further, this is not the first time Moscow has been hit.  Nor did we see massive civilian mobilization when Priggy went on his wild ride.  Basically everyone sat back and watched.

Ukrainian and other posters have worked very hard to frame Russian mindset as 1) in vast support of Putin and this war, or 2) mercenary and amoral based on Russian apathy.  Those two point are not aligned but ok, we didn’t really have another spin.  Now “Russia staged a terror attack to blame it on Ukraine so they can mobilize” which does not logically follow out of #1 or #2.

 

Yes…the idea that Russians are going to say to themselves “Oh ****! We are no longer safe in Moscow….so let’s sign up and go to Ukraine!” is obvious bunk. The is a state level failure from a failing state. There’s no need to pretend otherwise. 

Edited March 23 by billbindc

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

In fact a terror attack is just about the worst false flag op to run here.

Absolutely.  On the other hand, having the highly skilled, all knowing security services thwart a well organized and funded US backed Ukrainian terrorist attack on an orphanage (or something) would be vastly, vastly, vastly better.  It would highlight the enemy's evil intentions while at the same time demonstrating safety and security in the hands of the competent security services.

This was no false flag operation, but as others have said that won't really matter.  Russia will use this for its own purposes no matter what the truth is.

Steve

[kimbosbread]

1 minute ago, billbindc said:

Yes…the idea that Russians are going to say to themselves “Oh ****! We are no longer safe in Moscow….so let’s sign up and go to Ukraine!” is obvious bunk. 

The goal of the propaganda is refine this down to just the emotion “Oh ****”. They do not want any more thinking than that.

They don’t need everybody to go sign up; they can drag them off too. If everybody is scared and irrational, they cannot respond to the mobilization except for passively.

[billbindc]

9 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

The goal of the propaganda is refine this down to just the emotion “Oh ****”. They do not want any more thinking than that.

They don’t need everybody to go sign up; they can drag them off too. If everybody is scared and irrational, they cannot respond to the mobilization except for passively.

Russians are already scared and irrational and mobilizing passively. Pretending this is some suave propaganda move doesn’t mean you have sussed it out…it means that you have been fooled by the previous rounds. 

To reiterate basis, real facts: 

A huge terrorist attack in your capital is…wait for it… bad for any government.

A huge terrorist attack your enemy tried to warn you about is bad for any government.

A huge terrorist attack you blew off because you found out about it from your enemy is bad for any government.

Incompetence and frantic efforts to concoct a story post fact is bad for any government.

Stop…please…from treating these people as anything but the ineffective, callous, incompetent geezers they are.