Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[NOVA Green]

Ukraine also hit a railyard in Eastern Donbas last night

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1578493789122883585

Here's some footage of the aftermath...

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1578731927368257536?s=20&t=cvDJGd...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

I think we can put to bed the notion that Woodbury is doing anything but Putin simping.

One of those people who long for nothing more than to be brutally sodomized by a jackboot.

[NOVA Green]

Maybe the railroad bridge repairs are not all they are claimed?

https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1579179139399323648?s=20&t=cvDJGd...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Maybe the railroad bridge repairs are not all they are claimed?

They did somewhat stretch credulity...

[Virginiá]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

lmao, this is literally a war. Destroying bridges is extremely common, especially for Russia. Just because it's a really big bridge doesn't make a bit of difference. It's still a bridge connecting Russia, the invaders, to Crimea, illegally occupied Ukrainian land.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

lmao, this is literally a war. Destroying bridges is extremely common, especially for Russia. Just because it's a really big bridge doesn't make a bit of difference. It's still a bridge connecting Russia, the invaders, to Crimea, illegally occupied Ukrainian land.

Attacking transport infrastructure of strategic importance has been considered perfectly legitimate in War since there has been War.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

[jaichind]

The Russian Security Council meeting is tomorrow.   I wonder if they will upgrade the SMO to ATO.

[Person Man]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

I think we can put to bed the notion that Woodbury is doing anything but Putin simping.

One of those people who long for nothing more than to be brutally sodomized by a jackboot.

I thought the only people with Nazi kidnap and rape fantasies were in cartoons.

[Person Man]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

lmao, this is literally a war. Destroying bridges is extremely common, especially for Russia. Just because it's a really big bridge doesn't make a bit of difference. It's still a bridge connecting Russia, the invaders, to Crimea, illegally occupied Ukrainian land.

What a snowflake…

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Belarusian tanks heading towards Russia, apparently. Ukraine claims they and other armoured vehicles are being pulled out of Belarusian long-term storage and given to Russia:

https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1579072795069546501
Belarus previously delivered artillery ammunition and the vehicles seem quite old even for Belarusian active service, so this claim isn't too bold. Lukashenko reduces the pressure on Belarus to join the war by demilitarising the army and helping Putin at the same time. Like Ukraine (but not to the same extent as Russia), Belarus probably has a large stockpile old/modernised Soviet equipment in storage/use respectively. The serviceability of the old stuff is questionable but surely not zero.

Edit: the tanks are T-72A, for those interested.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

I mean, whether or not we classify it as terrorism is ultimately irrelevant to the morality of the situation. There are circumstances where terrorism is a legitimate tactic, and this is undeniably one of them - we all believe this, unless we want to also condemn WW2 partisans. So if this was a terrorist attack, we can only hope for more terrorist attacks to be carried out against the terrorist state of Russia.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

I mean, whether or not we classify it as terrorism is ultimately irrelevant to the morality of the situation. There are circumstances where terrorism is a legitimate tactic, and this is undeniably one of them - we all believe this, unless we want to condemn WW2 partisans. So if this was a terrorist attack, we can only hope for more terrorist attacks to be carried out against the terrorist state of Russia.

The primary benefit of a terrorist attack is causing terror - often, this is really just a proxy for making partisans feel good about themselves, and can be of questionable utility. The primary benefit of a bridge attack is screwing with logistics. This looks like an entirely different kettle of fish.

[NOVA Green]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

I think we can put to bed the notion that Woodbury is doing anything but Putin simping.

One of those people who long for nothing more than to be brutally sodomized by a jackboot.

I thought the only people with Nazi kidnap and rape fantasies were in cartoons.

Held off posting this although I read it earlier today, but apparently there are quite a few Russian soldiers who apparently are actually real and not anime characters.

Very long story, so only selectively quoting.

Again we observe systematic war crimes committed against Ukrainian Civilians by Russian Occupying forces, apparently operating with total impunity from any potential sanctions from their chain-of-command.

Soon after Russian forces took her prisoner, the 52-year-old woman picked up a nail and carved her name into a brick wall.

A-L-L-A, she wrote.

Below, she scratched how many days she had been held in the shed outside a medical clinic in her hometown. Above, she wrote in simple words what she had endured in captivity: ELECTRICAL SHOCK. UNDRESS. PAINFUL.

Some of Alla’s writing is still visible in the small shed in Izyum, the city in northeast Ukraine, where she said occupying Russian forces tortured, raped and beat her while she was held captive for 10 days in July.

The men who detained her, Alla said, were seeking information about her son, who works for Ukraine’s internal security service, the SBU, and about her own work at the region’s gas company. Her husband, who worked at the same company, was also detained and tortured on the clinic’s property.

Washington Post journalists twice visited the site where she was imprisoned, once independently and once with Alla and her husband. Her account was consistent with what Post journalists found inside, including her name and other details still scrawled on the wall.

It was impossible to independently verify every detail of Alla’s case. But in an investigation into torture in Izyum, Human Rights Watch spoke to eight other men and one other woman who were detained at the clinic during the Russian occupation, said Belkis Wille, senior researcher in the group’s conflict and crisis division. The woman told the group she was threatened with rape but not sexually assaulted. A man who was held in a garage at the clinic during the same time as Alla reported that he heard women’s screams, and soldiers talking about denying food to a prisoner because she had not performed a sex act, Wille said.

For three days, the commander forcibly touched her and forced her to perform oral sex on him while holding her husband hostage in a garage nearby. Alla said she could hear her husband cry out as the troops beat him, and overheard the commander tell “my husband that he raped me, and that we both enjoyed it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/10/09/izyum-rape-torture-occupation-russia/

[Antonio the Sixth]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

I mean, whether or not we classify it as terrorism is ultimately irrelevant to the morality of the situation. There are circumstances where terrorism is a legitimate tactic, and this is undeniably one of them - we all believe this, unless we want to condemn WW2 partisans. So if this was a terrorist attack, we can only hope for more terrorist attacks to be carried out against the terrorist state of Russia.

The primary benefit of a terrorist attack is causing terror - often, this is really just a proxy for making partisans feel good about themselves, and can be of questionable of utility. The primary benefit of a bridge attack is screwing with logistics. This looks like an entirely different kettle of fish.

That's fair, although the psychological impact of the bridge's destruction on both the Russian population and the Kremlin leadership is a non-negligible side-effect. I'm not particularly wedded to any given definition of terrorism here - my point is merely that Ukraine has every right to engage in terrorism regardless, if doing so advances its military objectives.

[Frodo]

BAE, U.S. in Talks to Restart M777 Howitzer Production After Ukraine Success

There is a serious snag, though:

(...) But as the U.S. and its allies supply Ukraine they are depleting their own inventories. The war has, for instance, run down U.S. stocks of ammunition used in howitzers, and the Pentagon has been slow to replenish its arsenal.

Dormant supply lines often can’t be switched on overnight, and surging production of active lines can take time.

BAE estimates that it would take some 30 to 36 months to restart full production of the M777, not least because the company needs a new supplier of titanium material and suppliers to produce the weapon’s lightweight components.

This timeline obviously isn't going to work.  The war in Ukraine will probably be over by then.  Although it could still serve a useful purpose in equipping the Ukrainian armed forces in the latest NATO weaponry to deter any future Russian invasions until Ukraine officially joins NATO. 

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

I mean, whether or not we classify it as terrorism is ultimately irrelevant to the morality of the situation. There are circumstances where terrorism is a legitimate tactic, and this is undeniably one of them - we all believe this, unless we want to also condemn WW2 partisans. So if this was a terrorist attack, we can only hope for more terrorist attacks to be carried out against the terrorist state of Russia.

I could see Woodbury doing that tbh

[Frodo]

To complement my earlier post:

More than half of Ukraine’s tank fleet now reportedly consists of captured Russian armor

This war, as terrible as it has been for Ukrainian citizens, has actually proved a boon for Ukraine's military thanks in no small part to Western support, but also Russia's own incompetence. It has grown larger and stronger as the Russian army has proven itself weaker and less effective.  

[HillGoose]

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-blames-us-almost-forcing-putin-invade-ukraine-1750145

"Trump Blames U.S. for 'Almost Forcing' Putin to Invade Ukraine"

trump is such a pussy, why does he hate america so much

he's such a fan of all these axis of evil commies abroad that seek to undermine American interests

if he loves russia so much why don't he move there? u gotta wonder

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1578767684556111873

Beast Harkonnen's double. Probably in terms of willingness to commit atrocities as well as physically.

[Frodo]

Putin's war in Ukraine is taking a serious toll on Russia's ability to control its old imperial possessions in the Caucasus and Central Asia, never mind its ambitions further afield:

https://twitter.com/nytimesworld/status/1579129587442733061

[Badger]

For the first time during the war, Russian Forces in Ukraine will be under the command of one man, now "Commander-in-chief" Surovikin. He is the one who is credited for saving Assad's regime during the Civil War. Previously he was only commanding the Southern Campaign. Hardliners like Prigozhin and Kadyrov are backing him

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1578767684556111873

It's completely reprehensible the way your tone clearly demonstrates you are typing this with one hand.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

For the first time during the war, Russian Forces in Ukraine will be under the command of one man, now "Commander-in-chief" Surovikin. He is the one who is credited for saving Assad's regime during the Civil War. Previously he was only commanding the Southern Campaign. Hardliners like Prigozhin and Kadyrov are backing him

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1578767684556111873

It's completely reprehensible the way your tone clearly demonstrates you are typing this with one hand.

Days since this website gave me a mental image I wouldn't want in a million years: 0

[Badger]

Footage of the terrorist attack

Cool story bro.

What do you say about this morning's events in Zaporizhzhia, then?

He can't say anything with a mouthful of Putin.

[Badger]

Footage of the terrorist attack:

I think we can put to bed the notion that Woodbury is doing anything but Putin simping.

We were able to do that 7 months ago.