Jump to content

How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?


Probus

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, womble said:

I disagree. If it was a false flag op, the official drum-beaters would be shrieking from the rooftops about Nazi atrocities on the sacrosanct soil of the Motherland. Since they're not trying to get everyone angry about being attacked, I reckon it's "enemy action" for real.

Additionally, Russia's attempts at false flag deceptions have tended to be direct attacks on their own civilian population, rather than on their own military and POL infrastructure. So much less degradation of their war effort, and so much easier to raise indignation and hatred; attacks on legitimate military targets are both unwelcome signs of vulnerability and harder to spin as "atrocities".

This.

We are talking Russia here. Killing its own population and blaming it on whatever enemy is their classic trick they borrowed from their former WW2 ally.

Blowing up critical infrastructure directly needed to fight their war is not mobilizing. Just like losing the whole flagship with almost all of its crew of conscripts had zero mobilization effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Russia is in a no-win situation with these fires.  If they are genuinely accidents, then the government is reinforcing the notion that it's not able to take care of people's safety.  If they acts of external aggression (Ukraine), then it shows Russia's defenses are porous and its ability defend the people questionable.  If the acts are of internal nature, then it demonstrates that there is some active opposition to Putin's rule that isn't intimidated by his obvious (to everybody) police state measures.

So... no matter what the cause is, Russia has an incentive to keep it as quiet as possible.

What about using these things as false flag attacks?  Definitely not.  Why?  Because a few shells or rockets lobbed over the border is fairly easy to explain even if Ukraine is supposedly about to be snuffed out.  Lone artillery unit gets within range, fires off some ammo, gets crushed by the might Russian Airforces.  Great story!  Now compare this with massive infrastructure damage deep into Russia and uncomfortably close to Moscow.  Where's the obvious ability to retaliate?  Does this mean more deep strikes are coming?  How is this sort of thing to be prevented in the future?   Nope, that would be a terrible option for false flag attacks, especially when so many better options exist.

Any mobilization for any reason tips off the Russian population that the "operation" is not going well.  While some would say "OK then, let's do this right!" there's also a lot of people that will start asking uncomfortable questions like... why is mobilization needed?  Why are we fighting in Ukraine in the first place?  You say this is a war against NATO, but if that's true then why aren't we taking the Baltic countries back?  That sort of thing.

Steve

Steve.  Two factors why it isn't a false flag operation. (1) it's in sensitive military/oil installations, to generate hate and hysteria Putin's henchmen would blow up apartment buildings as in the Chechnya operation & (2) the Russia media are denying Ukrainian involvement, they are waiting of an "investigation" or blaming bad wiring. No. I would say it definitely a fifth column operation.  Another question I have: why doesn't Ukraine target the Kerch bridge?...it has to be a vulnerable target. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from destroying strategic targets, like the Belgorod heli attack, Russia will have to deploy or beef up their air defense to counter Ukraine. This attack was in a different region than Belgorod so Russia will have to maintain or shift units accordingly or risk further PR damage (and etc). S-400? Wonder what's going on with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Aside from destroying strategic targets, like the Belgorod heli attack, Russia will have to deploy or beef up their air defense to counter Ukraine. This attack was in a different region than Belgorod so Russia will have to maintain or shift units accordingly or risk further PR damage (and etc). S-400? Wonder what's going on with them.

Probably not that useful against treetop level attacks. It does tell something about (lack of) VVO involvement. I'd think that there should be constant airborne radar coverage along the borders, if not from AWACS then at least from MiG-31s? Those should be perfectly capable to deal with those pesky low level flyers.

Edit: Girkin thinks it was Belarusian saboteurs :D

 

Edited by Huba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Huba said:

I'd think that there should be constant airborne radar coverage along the borders, if not from AWACS then at least from MiG-31s? Those should be perfectly capable to deal with those pesky low level flyers.

Radar coverage doesn't work against a group of guys simply smuggling a bunch of drones into Russia in the back of their truck, possibly through Belarus. 😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

Radar coverage doesn't work against a group of guys simply smuggling a bunch of drones into Russia in the back of their truck, possibly through Belarus. 😏

Well that's just disappointingly unsportsmanlike. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Der Zeitgeist said:

Bonus points for smuggling Switchblade drones into Moscow on May 9th.

My thoughts exactly! I wonder if Putin has the balls to show himself on the tribune, given his widely reported paranoia about personal security.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it turns out to be a ballistic missile strike, I'd be surprised that the Russian AD didn't stop it cold. S-400 is supposed to be really good, isn't it? UKR S-300s seem pretty competent at dealing with inbound missiles, and wasn't one shot down near Berdyansk before "something else" sank that landing ship at the quayside?

Sensibly, the UKR armed forces aren't clearing up the uncertainties regarding attacks on Russian territory, since making solid claims would be handing the Russians propaganda material. Not that the Russians need much help.

Edited by womble
Got a place name mixed up
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, womble said:

If it turns out to be a ballistic missile strike, I'd be surprised that the Russian AD didn't stop it cold. S-400 is supposed to be really good, isn't it? UKR S-300s seem pretty competent at dealing with inbound missiles, and wasn't one shot down near Bryansk before "something else" sank that landing ship at the quayside?

Sensibly, the UKR armed forces aren't clearing up the uncertainties regarding attacks on Russian territory, since making solid claims would be handing the Russians propaganda material. Not that the Russians need much help.

If this isn't a coincidence (which would be really weird), then sabotage seems most likely:

@Der Zeitgeist I didn't know about this Maduro incident, thank!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...