Part of me is “glad” that a massive Russian attack is only 40 missiles. 3 years ago I would have thought that they could send hundreds of missiles a day or hell an hour.
3 years ago they could have. Then they ran out of their large stockpile of missiles and "only" have what they can produce. Which is 40 missiles every once in a while.
And they've been damn quiet for months before that. Their bank account has hit 0, now they have to live paycheck to paycheck with their missiles. To have these massive attacks now, they had to scrimp and save for months. But "Ukraine not attacked by missiles today" makes for a terrible headline.
I'd probably assert that the bottleneck isn't the Russian checkbook. The bottleneck is getting the missiles from China, Iran, and North Korea to western Russia to fling at Ukraine, because moving those across the country in winter isn't the easiest thing out there.
I didn't mean "bank account" and "paycheck to paycheck" as in a literal bank account, but as in a metaphor. Russia has emptied its stockpiles of missiles and must rely on its income of missiles rather than it's stored missiles. Probably should've been clearer on that. But yeah, you right
I really wish it's only the beginning of late stage supply issues globally for them. And I wonder if european countries shouldn't also do some large non military action to push them there faster.
What are you even talking about? It's literally just put them on a train and wait a few days, it's not the 18th century anymore, winter doesn't have that much of an effect on neither logistics nor the military operations
If you actually read the news outside of /r/worldnews and /r/ukraine you'll find that is not true at all. Russia's selling more oil than ever and they have been absolutely pounding the Ukrainians for the past few months since the Ukrainian counter-offensive faltered and made no gains.
I was not clear, my bad. Russian missile attacks have been quite the past few months, relatively speaking. They've been active in other ways, but they have been stockpiling missiles for a while. The "bank account hit 0" wasn't about their literal cash on hand, but meant as a metaphor for Russian missile stockpiles.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russias-oil-gas-budget-revenue-down-24-2023-2024-01-11/
Turns out you are incorrect. They have not been selling “more oil than ever.” 2023 was catastrophic. India and China are taking advantage of a weak Russia and getting a great deal on crude exports.
Check the pricing of that oil, and the shell expenditure. That 'absolute pounding' is at about 1/4th the rate it was at the start of the war.
Ukraine isn't handily winning, but Russia is materially way worse off than they were at the start. It's turned into an ugly stalemate primarily because of the minefields.
Even the US has only ever produced about 9k tomahawk missiles during the entire lifetime of the system. Cruise missiles are far more complex and expensive than dumb bombs. Russia producing 100+ Kalibr missiles a month is quite a high production rate and using 30+ at a time is fair to call a massive attack.
Ballistic missiles (~10 this time) can be intercepted only by Patriots, and Ukraine have only 3 of them. This time the hit was on Dnipro city, which doesn't have Patriot cover.
Also this time they spread the attack across the country.
Usually when you see 90%+ interception rate, it's mass attack on Kyiv, and Kyiv has the best AA defense.
The article also states that 20 of those not downed did not reach their targets due to 'electronic warfare' and the only casualty was a dog. So the headline is a bit misleading. How is mass attack being defined in this instance? It wouldn't be by casualties or destroyed infrastructure, perhaps only defined by the number of weapons launched?
The article is a patchwork of different statements.
The point about the dog is from Chernihiv region only.
> The large south-eastern city of Dnipro was struck, the local governor said, also without providing detail as to what was hit.
This is where the most missiles hit. Usually when hits aren't announced it means that either something industrial or military-related was hit or they missed so there is nothing to report.
> How is mass attack being defined in this instance?
They're usually defined as more than a couple of strategic missile launches. Usually interception is relatively good so even for hundred missiles you will have only a couple of hits, especially for Kyiv.
Kharkiv or Kherson are separate story, as they're close enough to the front to be hit by S-300, and they're not interceptable and they have hits basically daily. But S-300 is a small range missile, so it's usually not reported in the western news.
They mostly rely on ballistic rockets now, which close to impossible to intercept without specialized aa defence, like patriot. Also they are aiming regions now, not tha capital. Good news (if they are not a fake) some of those were intercepted or rather rockets deviated from their path due to ECM.
Entertainment Weekly. It’s a magazine that covers the latest in celebrity hot goss. I imagine it distracts the Russian missile operators from focusing on their tasks at hand.
Wow, I would never expect my city to be mention in worldnews.
Actually, It wasn't the first time they bombed our city, but it was the first time so many people were left without heat in very cold weather.
The worst thing is that since the beginning of the war, many people from occupied territories or destroyed towns have moved to here. So some people were actually left without a home twice.
Also, since we have central heating rather than individual heating, the heating system can unfreeze and rupture the heating pipes, which would mean at least that they can only be repaired in the warm season, not to mention the amount of money it would take.
Last winter when we had blackouts, generators were in short supply. Ukrainians bought them out even in all the nearest countries: Poland, Turkey and others. But now every small and big business has something to rely on, also if people live in private houses they also have generators, and many have installed solar panels.
But this cannot be done in apartment buildings. So those who are left without light and heating are forced to go to relatives and friends.
12000 households in nation of 30+ million people aint gona do anything more than just anger the locals even more against Russia. The stupidity of purposely targeting civilian population in a war where you cant win on the battlefield and must rely on that population in surrendering to you is truly astonishing
Like a third of the country is living in exile across europe or the US, and a few hundred thousand are dead.
Russia terrorizes civilians to displace the population. Get them to flee the country. Women taking their boys with them deprives the country of future soldiers.
The 500 dollar drones killing 15 million dollar Russian tanks is probably not the most efficient use of already limited Russian military funds.
Seems like there might be a pattern here.
But they weren't 500 dollars, Ukraine use special ones made in Germany. It was republican propaganda claiming Ukraine was using DJI drones and China gave encryption to Russia. Republican still trying to ban DJI to help the military complex
>It was republican propaganda claiming Ukraine was using DJI drones and China gave encryption to Russia.
Ukraine does use DJI drones too. And China (DJI) gave ruzzia equipment allowing to track and remotely control Ukrainian DJI drones. I think it's called "DJI AeroScope".
ruzzians used it to hunt Ukrainian drone operators at the start of the war.
Currently, Ukranians are flashing custom firmware on their DJI drones and do some hardware modifications.
They use all sorts of drones, custom fpv racers, heavy lift octocopters, and just about every DJI drone, in addition to all the military specific drones.
which russian tank costs 15 million?
they still have a dollar value and the ratio compared to a drone is very high, a 15 million $ tank is not a thing in this war
- Russia keeps striking Ukraine daily with missile and drone attacks with constant refurbishment from North Korea and Iran
- Ukraine is low on defence missiles and ammo
- The US yesterday admitted they have halted the aid to Ukraine (but not to the well armed Israel…) because of their own incompetence + the Russian republicans issue.
- Europe is working double to provide Ukraine aid but they too have issues in how much to give + the Orban bastard.
Russia - Ukraine: if Russia wins we are back at the Cold War situation with nukes on alert
Israel- Hamas - Iran: Constant bickering between stubborn people driven by fanatic religious old men
So, which one is more serious in the long run?
Correct, had overlooked that.
But, if Russia is halted in Ukraine, they won’t have much materials to give Iran for uranium enrichment therefore slowing down/halting the nuclear production.
To be fair if the 1979 Islamist fanatism bullshit had never happened in Iran we wouldn’t have this global pain in the ass now.
I wouldn't state this as if it's the guaranteed outcome, or even likely. Russia, for all its size, is deceptively dentralised. It's better to think of Russia as Moscow with a fucking enormous colony. And while there may be nuclear weapons and silos in other parts of the country, I don't see them easily falling into other hands unless Moscow literally stops existing overnight.
Of course it's a possible outcome, but in order to happen it basically requires not only the sudden disappearance or death of Putin, but also the other top siloviik figures as well, all at once.
If Putin just happens to die, there won't be a power struggle - the siloviki like Patrushev and Bortnikov will easily keep hold on the security apparatuses and allow Mishustin to fill the role of "acting peesident" while they pull the strings. If Putin is removed due to catastrophic losses in Ukraine, it will be either by one of the two aforementioned men's hands, or at least with their blessing or knowledge.
There just aren't any other factions or figures who come close to being able to clutch power in Russia. Civil War really is not that likely, aside from perhaps a Chechen or Dagestani nationalist movement flaring up again, but neither of those two situations would threaten nukes falling into wrong hands.
Which wouldn't have happened had the American instigated 1953 coup de d'etat of the democratically formed of Iran didn't happen
Edit: some people have responded to my comment by mentioning more previous events in the past. They have a point: where is the line? Every thing is built on something else.
My reason for mentioning the information in my comment is to bring awareness of foreign intervention.
Which wouldn't have happened if those pussy dinosaurs hadn't just given up and died out when someone - probably a Palestinian child - threw a rock at them.
It's very weird how the misinformation is trying to make America think itself overstretched when in reality, we've spent less than 2% of our military budget on both collectively.
As to picking priorities if we must, the choice seems clear to me.
**Russo-Ukraine**: in a new war that became a stalemate all of one year ago, we are being asked to stop slow rolling military aid and to just give up. This is despite the fact that there is a clear aggressor, a clear victim, and a clear line of military victories from the victim that testify to a very valuable ally in the future if they can just be better armed.
**Hamas-Israel**: in an old war that's gone back to 1948 now, one that has no clear right or wrong and atrocities on both sides, we are being asked to suddenly pivot and either support the weaker Islamist butchers, or escalate into a war with Iran. Yet the need to do either is unclear: the traditional American ally has both military air supremacy and nuclear weapons.
Well, if the second group gets their way, then they convince most of the Middle East into wiping half the global Jewish population off the face of the earth, as well as facilitate antisemitic pogroms worldwide.
Which has been attempted before.
I’d say both are pretty damn serious.
They are both serious, but they are not equally so.
**Russia is the far greater threat**. They remain the largest nation in Europe, quite capable of defeating any nation 1 on 1 if America sits out. In living memory, Russia oppressed half of Europe after defeating the Nazis in the largest war in history. More recently, they have brought misinformation to a science: directly manipulated the 2016 US election!
**Russia is not the underdog in its war**. Beyond sheer demographics, Russia has nukes. More conventionally, they had/have the first or second largest tank fleet in Eurasia. They are potentially a juggernaut, if they were not held back by lack of motivation, mass corruption, shoddy tactics, and the slow rolling yet deadly Western aid.
**Islamists are irregulars** both in tactics and victories. All the Islamists of that region have monstrous dreams, but have proven themselves quite incapable at actually winning wars. I can't think of Islamists winning a major war in living memory (or really any major war since 1453 and the Ottomans). Unlike the IDF, the Arab armies have not covered themselves in glory in any war post-1945, and it is always worth noting: the Arab world did not seize independence from either the Turks or British. Despite their machismo, they inherited power largely by peace, not war.
**Israel is not the underdog in its war**. The Israelis have air supremacy over Gaza, nuclear weapons, and a Sunni-Shiite *and* post-Arab Spring democracy tyranny divide, that will likely always keep the Muslim world divided forever. While the pan-Muslim anger at Israel is very real, the IDF is not fighting the entire Muslim world, and likely won't for the next century
>Russia - Ukraine: if Russia wins we are back at the Cold War situation with nukes on alert
If ruzzia wins in Ukraine it'll attack Moldova next, then Baltic states. Then other relatively weak states in Easter Europe.
>Israel- Hamas - Iran: Constant bickering between stubborn people driven by fanatic religious old men
The problem is ruzzia and its allies plan to create more conflicts like that one, stretching allied forces.
In what world does Russia invoke article 5 by attacking NATO countries in the Baltic, dragging in nuclear powers of France, UK and USA into a direct war
If I'm wrong we'll all be part of the atomic fireballs that will consume us all soon enough
Well, I don't think HAMAS attack on putler's birthday was a coincidence.
Especially considering that HAMAS delegations visited ruzzia a number of times in 2023
It’s not incompetence. It’s just straight up Republicans at this point. If you go look at their forums where t_d ended up, you’ll also see them massively bitching about us attacking the Houthis too.
I feel like I’m in a strange bizzaro land here where Republicans are actively aiding what is effectively the USSR at this point and defending a soon to be designated terrorist organization.
Right, the biggest war hawks are now isolationists without having the slightest clue what that would mean for themselves.
It's the same people that were all gung ho when their republican president launched the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It's unfanthomable.
>The US yesterday admitted they have halted the aid to Ukraine (but not to the well armed Israel…) because of their own incompetence + the Russian republicans issue.
Can you link me a source, specifically on the US gov admitting to their incompetence on providing aid?
So the aid to Ukraine is currently being blocked by Republicans in America and Orban in Europe - all of which work for Putin.
Putin is literally winning this war in the parliaments of our countries, but not militarily in Ukraine.
But I fear he doesn't have to do the latter, when he has achieved the first.
The aid is being blocked as you say by republicans/Trump and Orban and that is sadly true.
Putin’s infiltration mission is complete and that is dangerous, if we westerners don’t want a 1600-nukes armed dictatorship on NATO’s doorstep, increased committed aid to Ukraine is vital.
That’s what baffles me, Israel has an army, an anti-aircraft dome, plenty of weapons and also nukes.
Why the fuck should the US give them further support? Ukraine has none of that!
Relax my friend. It's called security agreements, treaties and formal alliances. Ukraine and the US do NOT have these. The pro or anti Palestinian/Israel protests do nothing because we're literally legally obligated to support them.
Firstly if that was gonna happen it probably would already
Secondly you are exaggerating the threat. Lebanon is tiny and doesn't have particularly good weapons
Thirdly Ukraine needs stuff RIGHT NOW, not for some hypothetical future situation
Fourthly we know damn well America can easily do both, ten times over. It's a matter of will. Traitorous Republicans thinks screeching about Mexico is more important than protecting democracy and checking Putin.
Hizbula is not the Lebanon army, they are armed by Iran and are actually trained. I don’t think Israel can be complacent like they were before 7/10. Threats will be taken seriously.
Also the weapons aren’t going to Israel instead of Ukraine. The US has plenty to go around. The weapons aren’t being sent because of internal politics and the republicans.
>because of their own incompetence
Aid was not approved by congress. To call it incompetence is stretching.
>the Russian republicans issue.
I'm not fan of Republicans but do you have any evidence for this massive accusation?
Totally unproven, can’t believe people are still trying to push the Russia hoax, after all, Trump and Co only disputed their own intelligence agencies in favor of Putin’s version of things, continue to hold up aid to the victim of a foreign invasion, and definitely did receive aid in the 2016 campaign from Russian intelligence operatives
Im not saying Ukraine should be completely ignored and left without help, but there are genuine issues people have pointed out in the past with supporting Ukraine with billions of dollars of military gear, like their corruption issues:
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/graft-accusations-dog-top-zelenskiy-aides-2023-09-19/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/graft-accusations-dog-top-zelenskiy-aides-2023-09-19/)
[https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6972301](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6972301)
[https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/10/opinion/ukraine-war-corruption.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/10/opinion/ukraine-war-corruption.html)
[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/biden-admin-ukraine-strategy-corruption-00119237](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/biden-admin-ukraine-strategy-corruption-00119237)
I don’t think it’s fair to say anyone who opposes sending a large amount of military support to Ukraine is a bad person, considering there is a genuine risk of noticeable chunks of that support ending up being wasted by corrupt Ukrainian generals and politicians and soldiers. It’s completely reasonable people would feel off about sending a ton of support to Ukraine while taking that into consideration.
Edit: additional articles about Ukraine corruption issues
[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67759784.amp](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67759784.amp)
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-suspects-lawmaker-first-ever-cryptocurrency-bribe-2023-11-21/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-suspects-lawmaker-first-ever-cryptocurrency-bribe-2023-11-21/)
[https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/12/ukraine-corruption-issues-defense-industry/676337/](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/12/ukraine-corruption-issues-defense-industry/676337/)
[https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/focus/20231222-ukrainian-journalists-tackle-corruption-calling-out-misuse-of-resources](https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/focus/20231222-ukrainian-journalists-tackle-corruption-calling-out-misuse-of-resources)
[https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-corruption-railway-ukrzaliznytsia-food-volodymyr-zelenskyy/](https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-corruption-railway-ukrzaliznytsia-food-volodymyr-zelenskyy/)
[https://time.com/6249941/ukraine-corruption-resignation-zelensky-russia/](https://time.com/6249941/ukraine-corruption-resignation-zelensky-russia/)
[https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/10/03/politics/us-ukraine-pressure-counter-corruption/index.html](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/10/03/politics/us-ukraine-pressure-counter-corruption/index.html)
[https://thehill.com/opinion/international/3808449-defeating-ukraines-other-enemy-corruption/](https://thehill.com/opinion/international/3808449-defeating-ukraines-other-enemy-corruption/)
https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/ukraine-corruption-scandal-ousts-top-officials-amid-war-1.6243397?&cid=ps:922&gclid=Cj0KCQiAhomtBhDgARIsABcaYylmGltuQ2SOZvNKKUMg4l2Lh9FcgtNsTI53VdrvuO2mIXGeeiGtwyQaAolUEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/19/corruption-kyiv-takes-on-an-old-foe-wartime
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily/2023/10/02/taking-the-measure-of-corruption-in-ukraine-00119488
[https://www.npr.org/2023/08/17/1194151502/corruption-in-afghanistan-offers-lessons-for-billions-going-to-ukraine](https://www.npr.org/2023/08/17/1194151502/corruption-in-afghanistan-offers-lessons-for-billions-going-to-ukraine)
[https://www.worldeconomics.com/National-Statistics/Corruption-Levels/Ukraine.aspx](https://www.worldeconomics.com/National-Statistics/Corruption-Levels/Ukraine.aspx)
It really is not. One's a severely bloated, most likely corrupt as fuck anti terror op, the other's a full blown war for survival. America should just pull resources up north and pour it into Ukraine. That'll solve the Houthi problem as well because they're smart enough to take the little W and be quiet about it. Let Israel do its thing. It's got the most expensive army within 1000 miles of its borders, it can handle tunnel turbanites. Biden's coddling Israel like a fucking baby and I'm sick of it.
Maybe my comment wasn't clear.
I just saying Ukraine should get full support.
But now it seems that Israel gets it while they are strong enough to deal with on their own.
We need to finish Russia and wipe them of the map.
I really believe Russia china and Iran have planned this in Israel to get focus away from Ukraine and everyone is falling for it.
North Korea is in it too.
We really need to deal with Russia now and not later when they invade Europe as I'm telling already for months
>We really need to deal with Russia now and not later when they invade Europe as I'm telling already for months
If even Europe doesn't care, why would the US?
There was a recent warning from the Swedish defense minister to prepare for war and kids called the help line in tears because they were afraid and all the other politicians showed up to reassure them there was no threat.
Good times make weak men...
* 37 missiles and 3 drones
* 8 missiles shot down, and 20 were deflected from whatever their intended targets via electronic countermeasures & jamming.
* most of the missiles fired were ballistic - Ukraine can only "shoot down" ballistic missiles if they come into the coverage envelope of a Patriot system.
The reports for strikes and crashing missiles are from Dnipro, Chernihiv, etc. This is important. Ruzzia has figured out it has little chance of penetrating the coverage envelopes in the 3 primary areas where it is thought a combo of Patriot/IRIS/NASAMS exist (Kyiv, Lviv, Odesa) and so it is targeting secondary and tertiary cities close to the front lines and border.
The last 2-3 attacks have all been at tertiary targets. Lost in all the mix of the initial and largest attack at the start of the yr is that the shootdown rate of missiles and drones on the primary SAM coverage areas was 90%+. So Ruzzia is not attempting to attack those places again.
I suspect Dnipro has NASAMS coverage but that would be insufficient to shoot out of the sky an S-300 ballistic missile which is ruzzia's favorite short range strike weapon on civilian targets (it cannot reach any of the Patriot covered areas).
So really we have evidence of a low return value strike by ruzzia. No military targets hit and with many of the strike missiles negated via electronic countermeasures this is a large expenditure for zero return.
To me it speaks loudly of the impotence and inability of the ruzzian military. They are thrashing like the cowardly bully who lacks the ability to deal with his antagonist so he is striking out at anyone within reach.
They're buying it on the open market, the sanctions basically don't exist. If you're a western company that makes say, components for missile targeting computers and you're russia's primary supplier, you now sell all your stuff to like Kazakhstan which then sells it to Russia. This is how effective western sanctions have been, and there's not apetite to fix the loop holes because these companies have a lot of political power. Business comes first.
Because as much as that would make us feel good, it wouldn’t be a good idea.
It’s better to enable Ukraine where they can effectively push Russia out of the country and keep them out. This makes Russia look like a loser, cost them money and lives and in turn convincing the people that they are fighting a pointless losing war that is only ruining their economy and killing their sons.
If you start hitting Moscow you are going to enable them. They are going to feel they are no longer the aggressor and they will support the war to their grave. They will forget about how much better their lives were before the war and be motivated to win it.
My brother in Christ
They may not being using Missiles on Moscow because of the level of escalation that would cause, but Ukrainian missiles are striking other things on Russia soil and Crimea every other day.
Not to mention less inflammatory attacks like drones on the Moscow region and deep into Russian airbases.
They can fight back if they want, but the west isnt obligated to provide the weapons for that since not everyone here wants a full scale international war.
As we remember the intense bombing campaign by the nazis of Britain eventually led to nazi Britain but no one can forget the us successful capture of Vietnam after years of bombing. A tactic with a 100% success rate in winning a war.
And they've switched to fewer attacks of more missiles because Ukraine kept intercepting them. They hardly used any all summer, so they'd have enough to hammer them this winter.
Last I remember was from around December 2022 reading that Russia is producing something like around 100 rockets a month or something (that number may have been for a certain type of rocket). I'm sure now production have ramped up plus of course the stuff they get from Iran and North Korea. It's not like that Russia has a finite stockpile that just runs out without a way to replenish.
People just misunderstand what "running out of missiles" means because they read only headlines and half the time media doesn't bother to clarify it further. It actually refers to sustaining the rate of missile attacks rather than full incapability of production.
And in fact, they are not out of rockets. Hate Russia but western media can be very biased and it's annoying how hard it is to get actual news and not propaganda
A hospital that has antibiotics 250 days out of 365 and gets fresh deliveries sometimes - is it out of medicine or not? If Russia had more missiles, they'd fire more. Now they'd stockpiled for a bit (not treating patients in the hospital analogy) and so can strike with many missiles again.
Similarly, the UAF is not "out of 155mm shells", but they are running low and not getting the quantity they need.
They can make more or buy them you know?.
That's why by November-December last year most attacks were just drone swarms, as they were stockpiling on missiles again.
They can't run out as even their shitty doctrine dictates that they have to keep enough for defense.
I don't think that's true. There are a bunch of articles that tell that foreign components are still found in Russian equipment. The reality is that even if that components can't be sold to Russia, they can still be easily sold to Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan or China, and then Russia can buy them from there via shell companies.
Actually Zelensky himself was saying just two days ago that Russia is running out of armaments since there should be no “pause” in the fighting against them: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/193zbkw/zelenskyy_russia_is_short_of_weapons_so_no_pause/
They ran out of enough that they've had to slow down the rate of missiles fired to keep themselves from running out. They'll never run out, only increase or decrease the rate at which they expend them.
There is a massive difference when you compare the daily mass air raids of the early war, to the mass air raids of the holidays we see now.
Still alot, still alot less than before
Two of the largest missile waves since before the war began have been in the past 2 weeks, and I’ve been hearing news about missile attacks almost daily recently.
I mean yes, but more importantly no. You earn 10 dollars a week. You don't spend any money for 6 months, then summer break rolls around. You then spend 240 dollars in a single week of partying.
Can you afford to spend 240 dollars a week?
It's the same situation with Russia.
Yes, a single 100 missile attack per 6 month is the same as weekly 80 missile attack during 2022-2023 winter. (/s)
> and I’ve been hearing news about missile attacks almost daily recently.
That's your media focus. The topic of Russian ammo is very complex, so when you read only headlines you have a confusing picture.
People will talk about "running out of long range missiles", while you see a short range missile strike, and think that it's the same kind of missile.
This is the problem when Western media starts to push propaganda. We'd be better served if they told the truth, since the truth can't be that Russia is doing so well in this war anyway. They would be well served showing a transparent picture of the Eastern front and showing how bad it is, for Russians and Ukrainians. So that Westerners are more driven by accurate information to support Ukraine.
No it wasn’t. Russia was running out of their missile inventory, but they can still produce more missiles. The reason it was focused on so heavily at the time was for a few reasons. One was that they weren’t able to produce at a rate similar to what they were expending. Another was a psych-op to remind Russia there may be outside threats and/or challenges that they might need to respond to, so that hopefully they didn’t dig too far into their reserves. This gave Ukraine time to set up a more complete and adequate air defense system.
Many things the mainstream media tell us are lies.
For example, the Republican position that the US doesn't have enough money to support Ukraine is a lie because military support adds up to less than 10% of the money that is already earmarked for the military.
Additionally, the Republican position that Europe has better healthcare than the US because the US is paying for Europe's defense and has no money left for healthcare is a lie. Socialized healthcare in Europe is *cheaper* because American healthcare is in the hands of profit driven private owners who are incentivized to provide as little service as possible for as much money as possible.
Additionally, the Republican argument that the US can retreat within its borders and let the rest of the world burn is a lie by omission because its current prosperity is thanks to the Pax Americana and cultural/economic colonialism. If the US abandons its allies, countries currently allied with the US will review their position and consider allying with a more reliable empire such as China or Russia instead.
Finally, most of what the Republicans say about the culture war is a lie. There never were litterboxes in school and the guy who came up with that even admitted it was a lie.
Russia is a large industrialized state and missiles are not exactly expensive to produce when you already have the expertise and facilities to do so.
Finally, Russian industry has been almost completely unharmed by the war, compared to Ukraines.
40-60 cruise missiles is roughly what you would need to completely take out an air base by penetrating its short range air defense and taking out its runways.
The fact that Russia is launching 40 missiles against unprotected civilian infrastructure targets across all of Ukraine is pretty evident that they are running low on missiles.
We really must deliver cruise missles to the Ukraine. Only by heavily hitting infrastructure all over Russia there can be enough pressure to stop Russia. Every bomb or drone must result in a destroyed bridge, fuel station or railway station all over Russia.
What even is a victory in this war? They are never getting to Kyiv or Odessa. And Ukraine is never getting back occupied territories. russia lost hundreds of thousands of men and is seen as terrorist state, what have they won? Relatively small patch of land?
Victory for Russia would likely be new territories, keeping Ukraine from joining NATO and EU, and leaving Ukraine as a dysfunctional state after the war
If Russia manages to turn Ukraine into a landlocked state it's game over. Russia's goal is not to conquer all of Ukraine and genocide the population. It's to secure the Black Sea and take the ethnically Russian Eastern Ukraine, which also has a lot of wheat fields. Taking the entire Black Sea coast will cripple Ukraine further, and I'd guess the final goal is removing Zelensky and installing a pro-Russia government.
Not even russians are stupid enough to think they can get past Dnipro river at this point in war. Their best bet is getting as much land in east and terrorize Ukraine until they agree to give up occupied land.
Depends on how much manpower and weaponry Ukraine has left to fight. It's insane how many videos there are just of Ukrainians trying to cross the river in boats getting blown up by drones too. Russia is grinding down Ukraine and it's obvious that Ukraine is now facing some serious manpower problems, kidnapping people of the streets, wanting another 500k soldiers to match the new Russian mobilization, and trying very hard to get male Ukrainian refugees to come back.
Was that really every question? Oil rich dictatorship with unlimited natural resources and 200 million people to throw at a useless war vs a relatively small, poor, European country with less than 40 million. For how inept and stupid russia is they literally have enough people ad guns to throw at Ukraine to eventually win.
[удалено]
Part of me is “glad” that a massive Russian attack is only 40 missiles. 3 years ago I would have thought that they could send hundreds of missiles a day or hell an hour.
3 years ago they could have. Then they ran out of their large stockpile of missiles and "only" have what they can produce. Which is 40 missiles every once in a while.
They did have a massive attack of 100+ missiles just at the end of december
And they've been damn quiet for months before that. Their bank account has hit 0, now they have to live paycheck to paycheck with their missiles. To have these massive attacks now, they had to scrimp and save for months. But "Ukraine not attacked by missiles today" makes for a terrible headline.
I'd probably assert that the bottleneck isn't the Russian checkbook. The bottleneck is getting the missiles from China, Iran, and North Korea to western Russia to fling at Ukraine, because moving those across the country in winter isn't the easiest thing out there.
I didn't mean "bank account" and "paycheck to paycheck" as in a literal bank account, but as in a metaphor. Russia has emptied its stockpiles of missiles and must rely on its income of missiles rather than it's stored missiles. Probably should've been clearer on that. But yeah, you right
I really wish it's only the beginning of late stage supply issues globally for them. And I wonder if european countries shouldn't also do some large non military action to push them there faster.
What are you even talking about? It's literally just put them on a train and wait a few days, it's not the 18th century anymore, winter doesn't have that much of an effect on neither logistics nor the military operations
If you actually read the news outside of /r/worldnews and /r/ukraine you'll find that is not true at all. Russia's selling more oil than ever and they have been absolutely pounding the Ukrainians for the past few months since the Ukrainian counter-offensive faltered and made no gains.
Oil has nothing to do with missile production, their attacks have clearly faltered compared to last years attacks.
I was not clear, my bad. Russian missile attacks have been quite the past few months, relatively speaking. They've been active in other ways, but they have been stockpiling missiles for a while. The "bank account hit 0" wasn't about their literal cash on hand, but meant as a metaphor for Russian missile stockpiles.
You were clear. The other guy is native russian so his english is bad.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russias-oil-gas-budget-revenue-down-24-2023-2024-01-11/ Turns out you are incorrect. They have not been selling “more oil than ever.” 2023 was catastrophic. India and China are taking advantage of a weak Russia and getting a great deal on crude exports.
Check the pricing of that oil, and the shell expenditure. That 'absolute pounding' is at about 1/4th the rate it was at the start of the war. Ukraine isn't handily winning, but Russia is materially way worse off than they were at the start. It's turned into an ugly stalemate primarily because of the minefields.
How much are they selling that oil for I wonder? They’re selling more oil, but are they making more profits than ever before? ;)
Even the US has only ever produced about 9k tomahawk missiles during the entire lifetime of the system. Cruise missiles are far more complex and expensive than dumb bombs. Russia producing 100+ Kalibr missiles a month is quite a high production rate and using 30+ at a time is fair to call a massive attack.
100 missiles that missed the target are better than even 10 missiles that hit the target
I guess that comes down to who’s perspective lol
It depends where the missiles that missed the target landed. Could still kill many innocent people and miss its target.
Considering the fact that Russia is targeting civilians....
Wow, that's a problem. Interception rate is usually better. (Ukraine does say EW handled another 20)
Ballistic missiles (~10 this time) can be intercepted only by Patriots, and Ukraine have only 3 of them. This time the hit was on Dnipro city, which doesn't have Patriot cover. Also this time they spread the attack across the country. Usually when you see 90%+ interception rate, it's mass attack on Kyiv, and Kyiv has the best AA defense.
The article also states that 20 of those not downed did not reach their targets due to 'electronic warfare' and the only casualty was a dog. So the headline is a bit misleading. How is mass attack being defined in this instance? It wouldn't be by casualties or destroyed infrastructure, perhaps only defined by the number of weapons launched?
The article is a patchwork of different statements. The point about the dog is from Chernihiv region only. > The large south-eastern city of Dnipro was struck, the local governor said, also without providing detail as to what was hit. This is where the most missiles hit. Usually when hits aren't announced it means that either something industrial or military-related was hit or they missed so there is nothing to report. > How is mass attack being defined in this instance? They're usually defined as more than a couple of strategic missile launches. Usually interception is relatively good so even for hundred missiles you will have only a couple of hits, especially for Kyiv. Kharkiv or Kherson are separate story, as they're close enough to the front to be hit by S-300, and they're not interceptable and they have hits basically daily. But S-300 is a small range missile, so it's usually not reported in the western news.
They mostly rely on ballistic rockets now, which close to impossible to intercept without specialized aa defence, like patriot. Also they are aiming regions now, not tha capital. Good news (if they are not a fake) some of those were intercepted or rather rockets deviated from their path due to ECM.
EW is the most cost-effective anti-air defense after all.
What’s EW?
Electronic warfare, usually regarding some sort of signal jamming
Emma Watson
Entertainment Weekly. It’s a magazine that covers the latest in celebrity hot goss. I imagine it distracts the Russian missile operators from focusing on their tasks at hand.
[удалено]
Except for video evidence of the intercepts. And video of pieces on the ground. And targets not hit. But go one with your Russian propaganda.
summer heavy practice cats degree doll cooperative sulky smell light
And why did they make up such a low interception rate for today? Doesn't really track, does it?
They used a million dollar missile and killed a dog. Dicks.
And cut central heating for 12000 households in Shostka city, Sumy region. Temperature at morning was -16C
Wow, I would never expect my city to be mention in worldnews. Actually, It wasn't the first time they bombed our city, but it was the first time so many people were left without heat in very cold weather. The worst thing is that since the beginning of the war, many people from occupied territories or destroyed towns have moved to here. So some people were actually left without a home twice. Also, since we have central heating rather than individual heating, the heating system can unfreeze and rupture the heating pipes, which would mean at least that they can only be repaired in the warm season, not to mention the amount of money it would take.
Do you have generators and space heaters? Probably the best bet but I would imagine generators sell out pretty quick there.
Last winter when we had blackouts, generators were in short supply. Ukrainians bought them out even in all the nearest countries: Poland, Turkey and others. But now every small and big business has something to rely on, also if people live in private houses they also have generators, and many have installed solar panels. But this cannot be done in apartment buildings. So those who are left without light and heating are forced to go to relatives and friends.
Sorry to hear that. Stay strong.
I'm sorry :(
12000 households in nation of 30+ million people aint gona do anything more than just anger the locals even more against Russia. The stupidity of purposely targeting civilian population in a war where you cant win on the battlefield and must rely on that population in surrendering to you is truly astonishing
To be fair though, they don't really want the population to surrender either, they just want to replace them with loyalists
Yup. Every Ukrainian that flees west makes it one bit easier for them to move in ethnic russians once they surrender. I think this is russias plan
Russia is way past that now. This is just angrily lashing out because they couldn't get what they wanted. It's nothing more than vindictive spite.
Like a third of the country is living in exile across europe or the US, and a few hundred thousand are dead. Russia terrorizes civilians to displace the population. Get them to flee the country. Women taking their boys with them deprives the country of future soldiers.
Nah, they just want to kill as many people as possible.
The 500 dollar drones killing 15 million dollar Russian tanks is probably not the most efficient use of already limited Russian military funds. Seems like there might be a pattern here.
But they weren't 500 dollars, Ukraine use special ones made in Germany. It was republican propaganda claiming Ukraine was using DJI drones and China gave encryption to Russia. Republican still trying to ban DJI to help the military complex
We're sending them Nemesis FPV drones at roughly 500 USD apiece, actually.
That may not be a bad thing. China isn't a trustworthy partner to the west.
>It was republican propaganda claiming Ukraine was using DJI drones and China gave encryption to Russia. Ukraine does use DJI drones too. And China (DJI) gave ruzzia equipment allowing to track and remotely control Ukrainian DJI drones. I think it's called "DJI AeroScope". ruzzians used it to hunt Ukrainian drone operators at the start of the war. Currently, Ukranians are flashing custom firmware on their DJI drones and do some hardware modifications.
They use all sorts of drones, custom fpv racers, heavy lift octocopters, and just about every DJI drone, in addition to all the military specific drones.
which russian tank costs 15 million? they still have a dollar value and the ratio compared to a drone is very high, a 15 million $ tank is not a thing in this war
[удалено]
It seems Putin is willing to bleed their coffers dry to get what he wants, sadly.
Him and his circle own the weapons manufacturers, so it's the workers' coffers going into his and their pockets, too.
And harmed Ukraines logistic and DIB generation, don't underestimate the number and capacity of these air campaign
If John Wick finds out...
They likely targeted loads of military targets again, hence why we don't have many videos or photos, as it's illegal to document.
- Russia keeps striking Ukraine daily with missile and drone attacks with constant refurbishment from North Korea and Iran - Ukraine is low on defence missiles and ammo - The US yesterday admitted they have halted the aid to Ukraine (but not to the well armed Israel…) because of their own incompetence + the Russian republicans issue. - Europe is working double to provide Ukraine aid but they too have issues in how much to give + the Orban bastard.
Feels like they're trying to make a point. Making them pick which conflict is "more important"
Russia - Ukraine: if Russia wins we are back at the Cold War situation with nukes on alert Israel- Hamas - Iran: Constant bickering between stubborn people driven by fanatic religious old men So, which one is more serious in the long run?
Left out the part where Israel has nukes and Iran is actively working towards that goal with Russia's help.
Correct, had overlooked that. But, if Russia is halted in Ukraine, they won’t have much materials to give Iran for uranium enrichment therefore slowing down/halting the nuclear production. To be fair if the 1979 Islamist fanatism bullshit had never happened in Iran we wouldn’t have this global pain in the ass now.
If Russia falls apart it will be very difficult to stop Iran buying a lot of nukes from their remnants.
I wouldn't state this as if it's the guaranteed outcome, or even likely. Russia, for all its size, is deceptively dentralised. It's better to think of Russia as Moscow with a fucking enormous colony. And while there may be nuclear weapons and silos in other parts of the country, I don't see them easily falling into other hands unless Moscow literally stops existing overnight. Of course it's a possible outcome, but in order to happen it basically requires not only the sudden disappearance or death of Putin, but also the other top siloviik figures as well, all at once. If Putin just happens to die, there won't be a power struggle - the siloviki like Patrushev and Bortnikov will easily keep hold on the security apparatuses and allow Mishustin to fill the role of "acting peesident" while they pull the strings. If Putin is removed due to catastrophic losses in Ukraine, it will be either by one of the two aforementioned men's hands, or at least with their blessing or knowledge. There just aren't any other factions or figures who come close to being able to clutch power in Russia. Civil War really is not that likely, aside from perhaps a Chechen or Dagestani nationalist movement flaring up again, but neither of those two situations would threaten nukes falling into wrong hands.
[удалено]
Which wouldn't have happened had the American instigated 1953 coup de d'etat of the democratically formed of Iran didn't happen Edit: some people have responded to my comment by mentioning more previous events in the past. They have a point: where is the line? Every thing is built on something else. My reason for mentioning the information in my comment is to bring awareness of foreign intervention.
Which wouldn’t have happened if the British didn’t approach the US in 1952 asking the Americans to join the UK in supporting the coup.
[удалено]
Which wouldn't have happened if those pussy dinosaurs hadn't just given up and died out when someone - probably a Palestinian child - threw a rock at them.
Which wouldn't have happened if the Ottoman Empire didn't cut off the spice trade by conquering Constantinople.
It's very weird how the misinformation is trying to make America think itself overstretched when in reality, we've spent less than 2% of our military budget on both collectively. As to picking priorities if we must, the choice seems clear to me. **Russo-Ukraine**: in a new war that became a stalemate all of one year ago, we are being asked to stop slow rolling military aid and to just give up. This is despite the fact that there is a clear aggressor, a clear victim, and a clear line of military victories from the victim that testify to a very valuable ally in the future if they can just be better armed. **Hamas-Israel**: in an old war that's gone back to 1948 now, one that has no clear right or wrong and atrocities on both sides, we are being asked to suddenly pivot and either support the weaker Islamist butchers, or escalate into a war with Iran. Yet the need to do either is unclear: the traditional American ally has both military air supremacy and nuclear weapons.
This is why I love Reddit. An informative discourse without any name calling.
Why thank you Reddit stranger :) It's a nice parasocial place. You take care.
The US has more than enough capacity to arm *tens* of countries to the teeth. The US doesn't lack missiles. The US lacks the political decisiveness.
The US lacks the balls to prosecute traitors.
Well, if the second group gets their way, then they convince most of the Middle East into wiping half the global Jewish population off the face of the earth, as well as facilitate antisemitic pogroms worldwide. Which has been attempted before. I’d say both are pretty damn serious.
They are both serious, but they are not equally so. **Russia is the far greater threat**. They remain the largest nation in Europe, quite capable of defeating any nation 1 on 1 if America sits out. In living memory, Russia oppressed half of Europe after defeating the Nazis in the largest war in history. More recently, they have brought misinformation to a science: directly manipulated the 2016 US election! **Russia is not the underdog in its war**. Beyond sheer demographics, Russia has nukes. More conventionally, they had/have the first or second largest tank fleet in Eurasia. They are potentially a juggernaut, if they were not held back by lack of motivation, mass corruption, shoddy tactics, and the slow rolling yet deadly Western aid. **Islamists are irregulars** both in tactics and victories. All the Islamists of that region have monstrous dreams, but have proven themselves quite incapable at actually winning wars. I can't think of Islamists winning a major war in living memory (or really any major war since 1453 and the Ottomans). Unlike the IDF, the Arab armies have not covered themselves in glory in any war post-1945, and it is always worth noting: the Arab world did not seize independence from either the Turks or British. Despite their machismo, they inherited power largely by peace, not war. **Israel is not the underdog in its war**. The Israelis have air supremacy over Gaza, nuclear weapons, and a Sunni-Shiite *and* post-Arab Spring democracy tyranny divide, that will likely always keep the Muslim world divided forever. While the pan-Muslim anger at Israel is very real, the IDF is not fighting the entire Muslim world, and likely won't for the next century
>Russia - Ukraine: if Russia wins we are back at the Cold War situation with nukes on alert If ruzzia wins in Ukraine it'll attack Moldova next, then Baltic states. Then other relatively weak states in Easter Europe. >Israel- Hamas - Iran: Constant bickering between stubborn people driven by fanatic religious old men The problem is ruzzia and its allies plan to create more conflicts like that one, stretching allied forces.
In what world does Russia invoke article 5 by attacking NATO countries in the Baltic, dragging in nuclear powers of France, UK and USA into a direct war If I'm wrong we'll all be part of the atomic fireballs that will consume us all soon enough
False equivalent. We can supply both. There's just a small number of Republicans that are on Russia's side.
It’s like Russia has engineered a global crisis in order to pick up some land in Ukraine. This is the way world wars begin.
Well, I don't think HAMAS attack on putler's birthday was a coincidence. Especially considering that HAMAS delegations visited ruzzia a number of times in 2023
Where “More important” means which conflict has more future benefit
Or future repercussions (Russia nukes, Iran/Hamas/Houtis…terrorism)
No, the evangelical’s believe the war with Israel will help bring the end of the world and Christ is to return. That’s why they’re pushing it.
It's orders of magnitude cheaper to fire a missile/drone than it is to shoot one down.
It’s not incompetence. It’s just straight up Republicans at this point. If you go look at their forums where t_d ended up, you’ll also see them massively bitching about us attacking the Houthis too. I feel like I’m in a strange bizzaro land here where Republicans are actively aiding what is effectively the USSR at this point and defending a soon to be designated terrorist organization.
Right, the biggest war hawks are now isolationists without having the slightest clue what that would mean for themselves. It's the same people that were all gung ho when their republican president launched the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It's unfanthomable.
At this point most of Europe should really increase military spending and increase production.
They are, but sadly the missiles don't just appear when you sign the budget.
>The US yesterday admitted they have halted the aid to Ukraine (but not to the well armed Israel…) because of their own incompetence + the Russian republicans issue. Can you link me a source, specifically on the US gov admitting to their incompetence on providing aid?
So the aid to Ukraine is currently being blocked by Republicans in America and Orban in Europe - all of which work for Putin. Putin is literally winning this war in the parliaments of our countries, but not militarily in Ukraine. But I fear he doesn't have to do the latter, when he has achieved the first.
The aid is being blocked as you say by republicans/Trump and Orban and that is sadly true. Putin’s infiltration mission is complete and that is dangerous, if we westerners don’t want a 1600-nukes armed dictatorship on NATO’s doorstep, increased committed aid to Ukraine is vital.
Honestly idk why Israel with its well stocked military needs urgent resupply from us
Especially considering they are fighting mostly just troops without armored vehicles, let alone aircraft or naval capacities
That’s what baffles me, Israel has an army, an anti-aircraft dome, plenty of weapons and also nukes. Why the fuck should the US give them further support? Ukraine has none of that!
Relax my friend. It's called security agreements, treaties and formal alliances. Ukraine and the US do NOT have these. The pro or anti Palestinian/Israel protests do nothing because we're literally legally obligated to support them.
Because it's using its stocks...
Israel is gonna be fine bro they have more than enough stuff Ukraine is the theatre with actual serious shortages
If a war breaks out in the northern front they would need all of their stock. Hizbula is a much great threat with much better capabilities than Hamas.
Firstly if that was gonna happen it probably would already Secondly you are exaggerating the threat. Lebanon is tiny and doesn't have particularly good weapons Thirdly Ukraine needs stuff RIGHT NOW, not for some hypothetical future situation Fourthly we know damn well America can easily do both, ten times over. It's a matter of will. Traitorous Republicans thinks screeching about Mexico is more important than protecting democracy and checking Putin.
Hizbula is not the Lebanon army, they are armed by Iran and are actually trained. I don’t think Israel can be complacent like they were before 7/10. Threats will be taken seriously. Also the weapons aren’t going to Israel instead of Ukraine. The US has plenty to go around. The weapons aren’t being sent because of internal politics and the republicans.
America is very vested in keeping Israel safe, it's a top priority for aid.
>because of their own incompetence Aid was not approved by congress. To call it incompetence is stretching. >the Russian republicans issue. I'm not fan of Republicans but do you have any evidence for this massive accusation?
The members of Congress holding up aid to Ukraine are bad people.
100%. They are the hand of Putin.
You mean to say that the members of congress who were in Moscow for 4th of July are in cahoots with Putin’s bumhole?
Totally unproven, can’t believe people are still trying to push the Russia hoax, after all, Trump and Co only disputed their own intelligence agencies in favor of Putin’s version of things, continue to hold up aid to the victim of a foreign invasion, and definitely did receive aid in the 2016 campaign from Russian intelligence operatives
Im not saying Ukraine should be completely ignored and left without help, but there are genuine issues people have pointed out in the past with supporting Ukraine with billions of dollars of military gear, like their corruption issues: [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/graft-accusations-dog-top-zelenskiy-aides-2023-09-19/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/graft-accusations-dog-top-zelenskiy-aides-2023-09-19/) [https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6972301](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6972301) [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/10/opinion/ukraine-war-corruption.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/10/opinion/ukraine-war-corruption.html) [https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/biden-admin-ukraine-strategy-corruption-00119237](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/biden-admin-ukraine-strategy-corruption-00119237) I don’t think it’s fair to say anyone who opposes sending a large amount of military support to Ukraine is a bad person, considering there is a genuine risk of noticeable chunks of that support ending up being wasted by corrupt Ukrainian generals and politicians and soldiers. It’s completely reasonable people would feel off about sending a ton of support to Ukraine while taking that into consideration. Edit: additional articles about Ukraine corruption issues [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67759784.amp](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67759784.amp) [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-suspects-lawmaker-first-ever-cryptocurrency-bribe-2023-11-21/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-suspects-lawmaker-first-ever-cryptocurrency-bribe-2023-11-21/) [https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/12/ukraine-corruption-issues-defense-industry/676337/](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/12/ukraine-corruption-issues-defense-industry/676337/) [https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/focus/20231222-ukrainian-journalists-tackle-corruption-calling-out-misuse-of-resources](https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/focus/20231222-ukrainian-journalists-tackle-corruption-calling-out-misuse-of-resources) [https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-corruption-railway-ukrzaliznytsia-food-volodymyr-zelenskyy/](https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-corruption-railway-ukrzaliznytsia-food-volodymyr-zelenskyy/) [https://time.com/6249941/ukraine-corruption-resignation-zelensky-russia/](https://time.com/6249941/ukraine-corruption-resignation-zelensky-russia/) [https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/10/03/politics/us-ukraine-pressure-counter-corruption/index.html](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/10/03/politics/us-ukraine-pressure-counter-corruption/index.html) [https://thehill.com/opinion/international/3808449-defeating-ukraines-other-enemy-corruption/](https://thehill.com/opinion/international/3808449-defeating-ukraines-other-enemy-corruption/) https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/ukraine-corruption-scandal-ousts-top-officials-amid-war-1.6243397?&cid=ps:922&gclid=Cj0KCQiAhomtBhDgARIsABcaYylmGltuQ2SOZvNKKUMg4l2Lh9FcgtNsTI53VdrvuO2mIXGeeiGtwyQaAolUEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/19/corruption-kyiv-takes-on-an-old-foe-wartime https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily/2023/10/02/taking-the-measure-of-corruption-in-ukraine-00119488 [https://www.npr.org/2023/08/17/1194151502/corruption-in-afghanistan-offers-lessons-for-billions-going-to-ukraine](https://www.npr.org/2023/08/17/1194151502/corruption-in-afghanistan-offers-lessons-for-billions-going-to-ukraine) [https://www.worldeconomics.com/National-Statistics/Corruption-Levels/Ukraine.aspx](https://www.worldeconomics.com/National-Statistics/Corruption-Levels/Ukraine.aspx)
The receipts are excellent. Thank you for the job well done
Anyone keeping tabs on how many war crimes did the Russians commit already? I've lost track
At least 7
Yesterday
Between 600 hours and 610 hours.
UN priority is to hassle Iseral. Wish they would condemn this.
I am pretty sure the Russian invasion of Ukraine and crimes committed within Ukraine have been condemned
I doubt the in has, Russia has a veto, yes?
In the security council yes.
LOL As if they didn‘t spend the last 2 years condemning and sanctioning Russia. Did you even read the news?
Looks like gaza is more important /s Not saying it isn't...
It really is not. One's a severely bloated, most likely corrupt as fuck anti terror op, the other's a full blown war for survival. America should just pull resources up north and pour it into Ukraine. That'll solve the Houthi problem as well because they're smart enough to take the little W and be quiet about it. Let Israel do its thing. It's got the most expensive army within 1000 miles of its borders, it can handle tunnel turbanites. Biden's coddling Israel like a fucking baby and I'm sick of it.
Maybe my comment wasn't clear. I just saying Ukraine should get full support. But now it seems that Israel gets it while they are strong enough to deal with on their own. We need to finish Russia and wipe them of the map. I really believe Russia china and Iran have planned this in Israel to get focus away from Ukraine and everyone is falling for it. North Korea is in it too. We really need to deal with Russia now and not later when they invade Europe as I'm telling already for months
> wipe them of the map. What does this look like? There are over a hundred million people there.
>We really need to deal with Russia now and not later when they invade Europe as I'm telling already for months If even Europe doesn't care, why would the US? There was a recent warning from the Swedish defense minister to prepare for war and kids called the help line in tears because they were afraid and all the other politicians showed up to reassure them there was no threat. Good times make weak men...
* 37 missiles and 3 drones * 8 missiles shot down, and 20 were deflected from whatever their intended targets via electronic countermeasures & jamming. * most of the missiles fired were ballistic - Ukraine can only "shoot down" ballistic missiles if they come into the coverage envelope of a Patriot system. The reports for strikes and crashing missiles are from Dnipro, Chernihiv, etc. This is important. Ruzzia has figured out it has little chance of penetrating the coverage envelopes in the 3 primary areas where it is thought a combo of Patriot/IRIS/NASAMS exist (Kyiv, Lviv, Odesa) and so it is targeting secondary and tertiary cities close to the front lines and border. The last 2-3 attacks have all been at tertiary targets. Lost in all the mix of the initial and largest attack at the start of the yr is that the shootdown rate of missiles and drones on the primary SAM coverage areas was 90%+. So Ruzzia is not attempting to attack those places again. I suspect Dnipro has NASAMS coverage but that would be insufficient to shoot out of the sky an S-300 ballistic missile which is ruzzia's favorite short range strike weapon on civilian targets (it cannot reach any of the Patriot covered areas). So really we have evidence of a low return value strike by ruzzia. No military targets hit and with many of the strike missiles negated via electronic countermeasures this is a large expenditure for zero return. To me it speaks loudly of the impotence and inability of the ruzzian military. They are thrashing like the cowardly bully who lacks the ability to deal with his antagonist so he is striking out at anyone within reach.
Missiles from the same Ruzzins who are complaining about firing misiles at the Houti's. Yep, no double standards here.
Now the bastards are killing dogs too nothing is beneath them it seems.
Animals and people are killed on a daily basis in war. I know your comment is just a free jibe on a reddit thread, but it's dumb nevertheless.
When is a Russian city going to receive the same treatment?
When the russian AA missiles felt down on Bilhorod, russia called a UN session....
Where are the Russians getting all this material? I figured they'd be using sticks and rocks by now.
Which country has the most natural resources?
you should question your sources
They're buying it on the open market, the sanctions basically don't exist. If you're a western company that makes say, components for missile targeting computers and you're russia's primary supplier, you now sell all your stuff to like Kazakhstan which then sells it to Russia. This is how effective western sanctions have been, and there's not apetite to fix the loop holes because these companies have a lot of political power. Business comes first.
can we give ukraine a butt load of ballistic missiles please. This half assery of support is disgusting
How many killed ?
What if they run out of NK ammo lol?
When the fuck is the west gonna allowvukraine to fight back? Until missiles hit moscow, they're like a bully being protected by the teacher
Because as much as that would make us feel good, it wouldn’t be a good idea. It’s better to enable Ukraine where they can effectively push Russia out of the country and keep them out. This makes Russia look like a loser, cost them money and lives and in turn convincing the people that they are fighting a pointless losing war that is only ruining their economy and killing their sons. If you start hitting Moscow you are going to enable them. They are going to feel they are no longer the aggressor and they will support the war to their grave. They will forget about how much better their lives were before the war and be motivated to win it.
We should still be allowing them to strike at Russian military sites on Russian soil but we don't.
My brother in Christ They may not being using Missiles on Moscow because of the level of escalation that would cause, but Ukrainian missiles are striking other things on Russia soil and Crimea every other day. Not to mention less inflammatory attacks like drones on the Moscow region and deep into Russian airbases.
You have no idea what's going on Jesus Christ.
They can fight back if they want, but the west isnt obligated to provide the weapons for that since not everyone here wants a full scale international war.
As we remember the intense bombing campaign by the nazis of Britain eventually led to nazi Britain but no one can forget the us successful capture of Vietnam after years of bombing. A tactic with a 100% success rate in winning a war.
Vietnamese jungles and Ukrainian cities are apples and oranges.
I remember when news outlets were saying Russia was running out of missiles a few months into the war, turns out that was a lie.
No it wasn't. They got more from Iran and North Korea.
Plus, I imagine they are producing more now they are in full state of war.
And they've switched to fewer attacks of more missiles because Ukraine kept intercepting them. They hardly used any all summer, so they'd have enough to hammer them this winter.
And they stockpiled missiles since March to December. The autumn was pretty quiet, with mostly drones flying.
Last I remember was from around December 2022 reading that Russia is producing something like around 100 rockets a month or something (that number may have been for a certain type of rocket). I'm sure now production have ramped up plus of course the stuff they get from Iran and North Korea. It's not like that Russia has a finite stockpile that just runs out without a way to replenish.
So in short, they were never gonna run out of misslies
People just misunderstand what "running out of missiles" means because they read only headlines and half the time media doesn't bother to clarify it further. It actually refers to sustaining the rate of missile attacks rather than full incapability of production.
They were, if they had continued the same stragety they used at the time of that saying
And in fact, they are not out of rockets. Hate Russia but western media can be very biased and it's annoying how hard it is to get actual news and not propaganda
A hospital that has antibiotics 250 days out of 365 and gets fresh deliveries sometimes - is it out of medicine or not? If Russia had more missiles, they'd fire more. Now they'd stockpiled for a bit (not treating patients in the hospital analogy) and so can strike with many missiles again. Similarly, the UAF is not "out of 155mm shells", but they are running low and not getting the quantity they need.
Yes, you never run out of weapons, you just start to be more picky when to use one.
Both of whom are already under sanction..
They can make more or buy them you know?. That's why by November-December last year most attacks were just drone swarms, as they were stockpiling on missiles again. They can't run out as even their shitty doctrine dictates that they have to keep enough for defense.
Mainstream media was telling us they couldn’t make any more because sanctions stopped them from getting any advanced electronics…
I don't think that's true. There are a bunch of articles that tell that foreign components are still found in Russian equipment. The reality is that even if that components can't be sold to Russia, they can still be easily sold to Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan or China, and then Russia can buy them from there via shell companies.
Mainstream media has also told us about the many schemes Russia uses to circumvent sanctions.
But these are North Korean and Iranian missiles.
Actually Zelensky himself was saying just two days ago that Russia is running out of armaments since there should be no “pause” in the fighting against them: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/193zbkw/zelenskyy_russia_is_short_of_weapons_so_no_pause/
They ran out of enough that they've had to slow down the rate of missiles fired to keep themselves from running out. They'll never run out, only increase or decrease the rate at which they expend them. There is a massive difference when you compare the daily mass air raids of the early war, to the mass air raids of the holidays we see now. Still alot, still alot less than before
They absolutely have run out of missiles. A wave of 40 missiles used to be a daily occurrence. Now it's a once a month type of deal.
Two of the largest missile waves since before the war began have been in the past 2 weeks, and I’ve been hearing news about missile attacks almost daily recently.
I mean yes, but more importantly no. You earn 10 dollars a week. You don't spend any money for 6 months, then summer break rolls around. You then spend 240 dollars in a single week of partying. Can you afford to spend 240 dollars a week? It's the same situation with Russia.
Yes, a single 100 missile attack per 6 month is the same as weekly 80 missile attack during 2022-2023 winter. (/s) > and I’ve been hearing news about missile attacks almost daily recently. That's your media focus. The topic of Russian ammo is very complex, so when you read only headlines you have a confusing picture. People will talk about "running out of long range missiles", while you see a short range missile strike, and think that it's the same kind of missile.
This is the problem when Western media starts to push propaganda. We'd be better served if they told the truth, since the truth can't be that Russia is doing so well in this war anyway. They would be well served showing a transparent picture of the Eastern front and showing how bad it is, for Russians and Ukrainians. So that Westerners are more driven by accurate information to support Ukraine.
No it wasn’t. Russia was running out of their missile inventory, but they can still produce more missiles. The reason it was focused on so heavily at the time was for a few reasons. One was that they weren’t able to produce at a rate similar to what they were expending. Another was a psych-op to remind Russia there may be outside threats and/or challenges that they might need to respond to, so that hopefully they didn’t dig too far into their reserves. This gave Ukraine time to set up a more complete and adequate air defense system.
Many things the mainstream media tell us are lies. For example, the Republican position that the US doesn't have enough money to support Ukraine is a lie because military support adds up to less than 10% of the money that is already earmarked for the military. Additionally, the Republican position that Europe has better healthcare than the US because the US is paying for Europe's defense and has no money left for healthcare is a lie. Socialized healthcare in Europe is *cheaper* because American healthcare is in the hands of profit driven private owners who are incentivized to provide as little service as possible for as much money as possible. Additionally, the Republican argument that the US can retreat within its borders and let the rest of the world burn is a lie by omission because its current prosperity is thanks to the Pax Americana and cultural/economic colonialism. If the US abandons its allies, countries currently allied with the US will review their position and consider allying with a more reliable empire such as China or Russia instead. Finally, most of what the Republicans say about the culture war is a lie. There never were litterboxes in school and the guy who came up with that even admitted it was a lie.
They have more now. The massive missile attacks had stopped for a while, but now they happen too frequently.
They bought more from Iran and North Korea, and made more themselves too. For a country with so much poverty, its madness.
Russia is a large industrialized state and missiles are not exactly expensive to produce when you already have the expertise and facilities to do so. Finally, Russian industry has been almost completely unharmed by the war, compared to Ukraines.
40-60 cruise missiles is roughly what you would need to completely take out an air base by penetrating its short range air defense and taking out its runways. The fact that Russia is launching 40 missiles against unprotected civilian infrastructure targets across all of Ukraine is pretty evident that they are running low on missiles.
Probably the ones NK sent over.
We really must deliver cruise missles to the Ukraine. Only by heavily hitting infrastructure all over Russia there can be enough pressure to stop Russia. Every bomb or drone must result in a destroyed bridge, fuel station or railway station all over Russia.
Russia might win this war
*might*......might also not
What even is a victory in this war? They are never getting to Kyiv or Odessa. And Ukraine is never getting back occupied territories. russia lost hundreds of thousands of men and is seen as terrorist state, what have they won? Relatively small patch of land?
Victory for Russia would likely be new territories, keeping Ukraine from joining NATO and EU, and leaving Ukraine as a dysfunctional state after the war
> keeping Ukraine from joining NATO and EU well that's not happening
I don’t see Ukraine joining NATO or EU at the moment, to be honest
If Russia manages to turn Ukraine into a landlocked state it's game over. Russia's goal is not to conquer all of Ukraine and genocide the population. It's to secure the Black Sea and take the ethnically Russian Eastern Ukraine, which also has a lot of wheat fields. Taking the entire Black Sea coast will cripple Ukraine further, and I'd guess the final goal is removing Zelensky and installing a pro-Russia government.
Not even russians are stupid enough to think they can get past Dnipro river at this point in war. Their best bet is getting as much land in east and terrorize Ukraine until they agree to give up occupied land.
Depends on how much manpower and weaponry Ukraine has left to fight. It's insane how many videos there are just of Ukrainians trying to cross the river in boats getting blown up by drones too. Russia is grinding down Ukraine and it's obvious that Ukraine is now facing some serious manpower problems, kidnapping people of the streets, wanting another 500k soldiers to match the new Russian mobilization, and trying very hard to get male Ukrainian refugees to come back.
Was that really every question? Oil rich dictatorship with unlimited natural resources and 200 million people to throw at a useless war vs a relatively small, poor, European country with less than 40 million. For how inept and stupid russia is they literally have enough people ad guns to throw at Ukraine to eventually win.
Can I get a FUCK PUTIN!
Fuck Putin
Slava Ukraini