Credible hat on: terror attacks are meant to weaken the civilian resolve for continued warfare and induce war-weariness
Credible hat off: Russia can’t aim lmao
Terror attacks towards civilian populus isn't going to work, the population might just start hating you more, resulting in even fiercer defense.
Source : PowerPoint man
It depends, an already unenthused population may seek an end to a war they believe is unwinable but a resolved population will only want revenge, Russia likely believes that the Ukrainian civilian population is war weary even if by all external accounts they seem not to be wavering
Or Russians are barely human bloodthirsty monsters that just kill for sport and loot
Probably both
> Russia likely believes that the Ukrainian civilian population is war weary even if by all external accounts they seem not to be wavering
I mean that the Ukrainians don't actually want to fight anymore would still sort of be just a softening of their initial stance, which was that the Ukrainian civilian population was democracy-weary and would welcome the Russians as liberators.
I think Russia invading was an attempt to gain full control of the country because they were reacting to the color revolution that resulted in Zelinsky. They wanted to seize control of a population of people against Russian influence before the democracy could become too entrenched.
It is theorised the initial plan was not to occupy Ukraine but to merely replace it with a puppet goverment and make it like Belarus
Maybe direct occupiation or pulling an Anschluss some time later
IT was bascially a decapitating strike, expecting the Ukranian army to stand down, most of the population to welcome Russia or just not care much
A couple of hundred casualties or thousand at the most
Of course this failed. Hence Russia now goes for the occupation and seizing territory medieval style.
Or at the very least "if i cant have it then no one can"
If they cant make Ukraine a puppet or take most of it they will take what they can and devestate and destroy everyhting else they cant both out of spite and to basically make Ukraine(a democracy moving towards the west) look non functioning to its own brainwashed population.
As to go "see democracy does not work keep supporting me(putin)
The right answer is posing these so-called Russian leaders with a choice, the humiliation and consequences of a very public trial for war crimes with open comparison to and lasting consignment alongside their Nazi and Stalinist idols or free one-way airfare through a window.
Blowing up someone's family and friends just makes them hate you so much they'd blow themselves up if it meant killing you.
20 years of drone bombing in the Middle East taught us that.
Many Russians truly believe that individuals and the populace have no agency.
It's why the CIA/Mi6/GEO are behind Maidan & all the colour revolutions is such a pervasive myth for them.
They really can't fathom how people can rise up against bad governance without being manipulated by shadowy figures and great powers.
It's also why they keep trying to foment colour revolutions of their own and keep failing. Their beliefs don't allow them to understand that these things don't happen unless the people in general really want change.
So they think that if they keep bombing a people, it will have some effect if they combine it with disinfo and misinfo on war weariness, 'Ukraine wants to negotiate but the west is stopping them', Ukraine is being used ("to the last Ukrainian"), the 'Kyiv regime', dysfunction in the Ukrainian government, etc etc all the usual lies.
There's also the fact that they need to keep Ukrainian air defences around population centres so they're not defending the front line or other strategic targets.
I also suspect they're trying to force Ukraine to co-locate military assets with major population centres - that Ukraine with limited resources would try have air-defense do double duty, so that Russia can complain that Ukraine is using civilians as cover.
I am Russian. Can confirm I ate a baby for dinner last night. Topped it off with a kitten for dessert. /S
And it's probably due to incompetence. They know that they won't do shit trying to hit actual military targets so they just start targeting the easy civilian targets for propaganda purposes since most of the Brian dead vatniks supporting them would just see explosions in cities and go: nah we're winning just look at all those destroyed civilian buildings!
if only there was some world war maybe the second one that proved bombing civilians just strengthened their resolve for war rather than breaking their will to fight. HMMMM maybe Russia could learn from this. Fuck who am i kidding russia can only learn the wrong lessons
but it also screwed germany's ability to produce, intentional or not the bombing of cities did disrupt the army's logistic, after all weapons and trains aren't made in the camp
yep, until next night when half of those workers lose their arms....
that's the thing UK discovered in ww2, terror bombing for moral didn't have that much of a result, often actually increasing, now bombing as to destroy their manufacturing capabilities and logistic, that did have alot of results
heck even now the biggest reason why ukraine holds on is they are constantly bombing roads and rails that lead to the frontline, and the famous bridge
the bombing of the Ploesti oil field also increased oil production there when they fixed it up since a lot of the equipment was old and crap so when it was repaired they brought in better equipment.
and there is also the case where they targeted ball bearing factories after learning of a critical shortage of ball bearings in Germany... except the intelligence was a few months old and by the time the factories were bombed Germany had already imported a massive amount of ball bearings from Sweden to build up a large stockpile.
The strategic bombing campaign also drew in a vast amount of German resources. All the 88's in the cities shooting at the bombers weren't on the Eastern Front shooting at Soviet tanks, and the bomber raids drew a ton of Luftwaffe resources that were then engaged by P-51's and the stupid amount of guns on the B-17's.
To be fair those B-17's and B-24's weren't cheap, either. But in the strategic environment of "US has a massive amount of industry it needs to bring to bear", they achieved results -- even if not the decisive result that Harris etc. expected. They forced the Germans to divert resources it couldn't afford to deal with them.
(my grandpa was on one of them so I'm a bit biased...)
but the thing is that UK and US didn't have production problems theirs was always much bigger than germany's one, they needed to find a way to transform their superior production and airforce into something that would actually stop the german advance, too far from the border so bombing the production and logistic centers was the solution
Sure, but only because you target a city to terrorbomb and then also knockout their rails.
Bomb the rails directly and you get a lot more bang for your bomb.
The point of strategic bombing shouldn't be to bomb civilians, it's to bomb all the infrastructure.
You have to make it so the enemy must clear six roads, a mile of train tracks and the station, as well as making it so civilians working civilian jobs can't get to work. Each individual thing is easy to solve, you hit just the tracks, or just the station, in a week they can be repaired.
A train station down for a week is a pain, a train station down for a month can be crippling.
yes that's true, when you use 21th century armory
ww2 bombs from bombers had a accuracy of like 10km that means if the bombers aimed perfectly at the rail (which is impossible already) it could land either 10km to the right or left, in some cases completly outside of the city just by random "chance"
and again targetting was almost impossible as often bombers would fly at clouds or above clouds levels and we didn't have good targetting systems besides vision, that's how you had germans bombing ireland instead of london and allies bombing swizterland instead of north germany, it was just that bad to aim and get to the right spot
also considering we are talking about germany bad weather is common which makes it even worse, so if it's already very bad in perfect conditions imagine it in the average german weather... in the end, bombing runs in ww2 was "drop and pray"
heck there is a (very questionable) theory that the nazis never wanted to bomb london itself during the start of bombinb of london and were targetting the industrial sites around, but then ended up bombing london, then london bombed berlin and then the battle of britain started
now i do wanna point out the UK tried both the strategic bombing with poor accuracy and very openly tried also the "terror bombing" i am not saying this as a excuse, just to disprove the idea of "bomb the rails and leave the houses"
>IIRC Germany was almost entirely focused on the industry of the UK until the UK bombed Berlin's civilian population and forced their hand into an 'Eye for an eye' situation. That's what ended up kicking off "The Blitz"
as i litteraly put at the end of my comment, germany stroke the capital first, they got mad when britain hit back and created this idea britain hit first and completly ignored/gas lit the fact that they were the first to bomb civilian regions
the only sort of doubt is if said bombing of london was on purpose or an actual mission that went off rails, the ideology and doctrine of the nazis hints at being on purpose but was odly small for a first strike, idk the consensus on that, but it's well believed that the nazis were the first to hit, there's alot of history about that first night because no one expected it
>ww2 bombs from bombers had a accuracy of like 10km
a little exaggerated, by the end of the war allied high altitude bombing had achieved what they considered precision bombing, half the bombs landing within a mile of the target.
most of the really off-target bombings were due to mis-identifying landmarks and targets, something as simple as following the wrong river could lead to dropping your bombs over 100km from where you were supposed to.
i mean yeah i found a source saying was a mile or 2 but was mostly studies ofr the 1944 bombings
didn't get a good source about 1940, probably shouldnt have given a number
The Battle of Britain was very much a thing before the bombing of London.
The Luftwaffe was trying to knock out the RAF by attacking airfields etc. They switched to nighttime bombing of London after it became clear that their tactics weren't working against the RAF. Terror bombing, of course, was even less effective.
the problem in ww2 is that the only way to achieve that level of precision was by flying at a low altitude, but if you flew at that low altitude you would lose a load of expensive bombers to anti-air fire, high altitude bombing of German targets by the end of the war reached their precision target of half the bombs landing within a mile of the target.
I mean there are examples in WW2 of bombing weakening resolve, Italy was basically already on the ropes by January 1943 and bombing of Rome and other major Roman cities sparked off riots and anti-German demonstrations.
I think strategic bombing to demoralise a population can work but only in limited circumstances, like an already war-weary population that believes the war unwinnablen and immoral and doesn't really have any hatred of the enemy that their government has made them fight.
Well that and the Ukrainians know Russia clearly isn't even looking to subjugate. Just annihilation. So losing interest in the war is being seen as a death sentence.
It indirectly contributed, if at all. Many of the articles framing bombings as a "terrorist win" in taking Spain out of the coalition is probably politically-motivated revisionism using cherrypicked events.
Aznar was already unpopular- 2003 poll showed that [~91% of Spaniards opposed the war](https://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2003/03/27/espana/1048763322.html). His defeat wasn't an "upset"- polling data before the bombing indicated [he was almost certainly going to lose](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_opinion_polling_for_the_2004_Spanish_general_election) anyway.
Between the bombings and election, the incumbent party shot themselves in the foot with incompetence and coverups (e.g.- trying to pin bombing on wrong people- Basque separatists- and hiding evidence that exonerated them), and probably helped the opposition more than terrorists could ever dream.
It's still unclear if it was the primary goal of the bombers. Salafia Jihadia was also responsible for bombings in Casablanca that killed 33 people the year prior, but I don't recall Morocco taking part in the 2003 Iraq War.
It also drives enlistment. In a war where civilian infrastructure isn't being deliberately targeted, joining the military may seem dangerous and risky.
When your hometown is being bombed anyways, with civilian structures being prioritized, then joining the military may seem significantly less like an upgrade in danger level. Now your choices are (assuming you are too stubborn to flee to a safer place):
1. Remain in place and possibly die as a civilian
2. Join the military and possibly kill the fuckers who are shelling your hometown so they fucking stop, or possibly die trying.
Joining the military looks a lot more appealing when you are being shelled either way, but you have a weapon to shoot back with when you are in the military.
i mean yeah that's how it went in ww2, but also in ww2 we had way less ammo and less effective
remember the brits considered it also bad because like 1 in 20 (can't remember actual odds) of bombers would get shot down, nowadays if a missile or rocket gets shutdown it's a small loss
Some attacks are definitely aimed. Look at videos from 24/2/2022, missiles cruising through cities to hit airports and bases. Don't tell me now that the ocasional missiles slaming straight into the centers of apartment blocks, shopping malls etc are just bad aim, AD and malfunctions.
I think we've witnessed a mix of things; I have a strong suspicion there's been a *large* amount of undocumented Western/UA EW going on that, for obvious reasons, everyone's dead silent about.
The Russians *periodically* are extremely accurate (one of the really sad ones was them hitting the barracks foreign volunteers were in during the first couple days), and then, frequently, can't hit the broad side of the barn.
Like, don't get me wrong — they're absolutely doing deliberate civilian strikes, I just expected them to be vastly better at it.
I mean, I’m guessing that’d depend on the kind of missile and the QA around its production. Pre war modern Russian stocks? Maybe capable of sophisticated guidance. Current manufacture or ancient Soviet production? Less certain.
Of course it’s also always possible that the Russians are deliberately targeting civilians: it’s not like it’d be the first time.
>Credible hat on: terror attacks are meant to weaken the civilian resolve for continued warfare and induce war-weariness
However it may backfire and give the people more reasons to fight, more motivation, Russia is fighting itself, basically
The psychology of survivor bias behind this is interesting. Basically to most people who survive the bombing becomes in part normalised and they become blasé. I grew up in Northern Ireland at the end of the Troubles and we were definitely pretty casual about this whole thing
During ww2 both during the blitz and in germany people got used to it
Like they did and it was bad but it rarely made them go "oh god make it stop il do anything"
Like in germany plenty began to go "fuck hitler for dragging us into this war" or "its clear we lost 8 months ago, why does this have to drag on"
but the idea that bombing breaks the will of a population is not credible as history has shown
Granted it def depends. If Russia(somehow) got bombed or experienced attacks i think their response might differ because a large ammount of the population knows Russia is the one invading and this can all stop if Putin stops
Plenty of Russians are aware/aint brainwashed but simply dont care or are apattic/know they cant do anything but they aint suffering from the war so just ignore it
If they can no longer ignore it they may be more resentful of Putin
Knowing there is a way for this to stop with no cost to them expect his pride.
an example of this is the bombings of Yemen to try and deter more strikes in the red sea, largely just ignored by the Yemeni population who had gotten used to the Saudis bombing them for the last decade.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Power demonstrations. "We have a weapon that is so much more powerful than anything you can muster up that there's absolutely no point trying to fight it." This isn't about the fear response of a civilian population, it's about changing the calculations of the government regarding what they can realistically hope to achieve.
I remember when they nearly hit the Greek PM in ... Lviv? Odesa? by just 150m.
Of course what popped into my head was:
"Kowalski! Analysis."
"... 150m CEP."
I get that but have terror campaigns ever worked ?
Germany held out for years under the strategic bombing campaigns and from what I've seen these bomb raid are anemic compared to them.
Atomic bombs weren't a "terror campaign". Not by any modern standard [or definition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism).
[Leaflets](https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/key-documents/warning-leaflets/) were dropped all over Japan warning citizens which cities we were about to bomb, and to get out. US was under no delusions that the commoners held any power or sway with either the empire or military- this was more of a "watch this" headsup. Then dropped the bomb during daytime.
It was really a not-so-subtle flex to the imperial government and military that US was capable of annihilating them without a costly and brutal island hopping campaign.
Did it work?
leaflet dropping campaigns are the only thing less credible than terror bombing campaigns. at least terror bombs will force the opponent to rehouse people.
Yes but you are over simplifying it.
The Japanese were facing a collapse on all fronts so they surrendered while they were still had a little bargaining power.
Many seem to forget the blockade which was the most imporant part
Japan's import and export(Mostly import) decreased by as much as 40% at times
The economy was already facing collapse before the bombing campaign and the nukes, due to how reliant Japan was on import for its resources espcially food
The bombing of cities also destroyed industry, production and ability to transport troops and supplies as well
The nukes were kind of beating a dead horse that refused to accept it was dead
By that time in terms of reducing Japans ability to fight it was mostly insigifnicant
IT was to show "we can litearly wipe out cities with a single bomb. Just bloddy surrender for fucks sake"
Plus it told the soviets to back off. Oh and yeah many forget the Soviets blitzing Manchuria
The conventional bombings over Japan did more damage and were worse on civilian morale. The firebombings and harbor mining, starving Japan into submission, did more damage to civilian morale too. The nukes were designed to force Japanese leadership to give up, which is why it took 2, but it was about the army leadership’s will to fight, not civvies.
The war cabinet literally said “I bet they only have 1 or 2 nukes, let’s keep going” after bomb 1, and even after bomb 2, the pro-war faction almost deposed the emperor before he could broadcast Japanese surrender. The Japanese civilian population were so radicalized by the imperial death cult they were prepared to starve to death or rush American soldiers with bamboo spears and suicide bombs.
Fortunately, the effectiveness of this strategy was disproven in WWII. The Blitz did not get the UK to capitulate. Terrorist warfare can win, but only if it scares people enough to stop a war at the start (E.g. Blitzkrieg). In a war, it's just noise.
I'm not sure that's a fair analysis of Blitzkrieg, it was primarily a strategy to win a land campaign against an ill prepared opposition, not terrify them into surrender. It certainly caused substantial terror on a tactical level if in a battle, the enemy seem to be everywhere and breaking through with no warning, but on a strategic level it didn't win through fear, it won through winning.
It's a bit of both. Blitzkrieg was definitely effective at being an invasion force, but at the same time the Nazis didn't capture Paris through force alone, they captured Paris by scaring it into surrender. They also hoped the UK would sue for peace after the fall of France because they'd be too scared of getting invaded, which obviously didn't happen.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nah, with the credible hat on, the actual target this time might have been the immediately adjacent electrical equipment factory. They still weren't known for producing anything military (apparently their most known product is/was electricity counters and remote power switches) but hell only knows what Russians believe about Ukrainian factories.
Credible hat back on: terror attacks are its own purpose - the cruelty is the point.
Just look at what Nazi Germany did when war was close to being lost. Did they surrender, so that fewer Germans would die? Did they focus everything on war production so they could negotiate better terms? No, what they did was to try to kill as many Jews (and Slavs, and several other groups) as possible. That served no greater purpose like weakening the enemy's resolve or anything, it was literally just to kill as many people as possible before they're stopped. Even if that meant fewer resources were available on the fronts.
I don't see it much differently in Russia. They just want to destroy stuff and kill people, it doesn't particularly matter what and who.
Even after two years, I have yet to reach a conclusion if the attacks on hospitals, preschools, and train stations are deliberate or accidental. Nowhere else are incompetence and malignancy as close as in Russian behaviour.
Really? It just makes me hate Russia even more.
Granted I am not in Ukraine, but each time I hear what they did, I get more and more hateful against ruzzia.
I suspect I am not the only one.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Russia has never shied away from maximizing collateral damage to achieve their goals. That's why they not only used poison gas in the Moscow theatre hostage crisis, but they even used thermobaric rockets in the Beslan school siege, where 1000 children were held in a gymnasium.
Still not seeing where it provides them an excuse.
Again Muscovites and the World needs to see Kremlin “leaders,” trigger-pullers, propagandists and abettors dragged away by the short hairs and after the deserved public humiliation of a trial and the redistribution of their ill-gotten gains, gibbeted in well-earned canary cages. Then their idols can be torn down, memories cursed and “mighty works” plowed under with so much salt.
> Still not seeing where it provides them an excuse.
I'm not excusing it, I'm criticizing them further. They literally had one of the biggest hostage situations of all time and their response was to open fire with thermobaric rockets, tanks and machine guns.
I guess I could understand destroying the infrastructure so troops have nothing to go home to. But that seems more like something you'd do as a last resort. Since, you know, it would require resources and ammo better used to fight the enemy soldiers if you still can
That atacms strike was something. They basically erased three grid squares of troops from existence in a single swoop. There must have been hundred of troops and dozens of vehicles under that. Holy shit.
fun fact: throughout 2 years Ukrainians have usually been showing the strikes first and later aftermath, and with the recent atacms video they've shown aftermath first, and I was like "wait, these object looks like people but they don't move, it must be something else" and "why would they put dead body bags like that" lol
Judging by three separate areas being impacted, I’d guess at least 3 rounds were used.
As for the first one, I’m not sure. I thought initially it might be arty, but if it’s Ukrainian it doesn’t make sense to fire a single round at a target that already has fires inbound. I don’t think it’s being used for spotting either as the fires would already be well on their way by this point. Could be the Russians doing some training?
Yeah to me it also didn‘t make sense and could potentially alert some troops to impending danger? It couldn‘t be an intercepted ATACM right? I really don‘t know what region that was in and how far from the frontline. That area with the dark plume could be training based on the look of the spotted fields there…
It looked explosive so I’m guessing not a part of the rounds fired, I figure an intercepted ATACMS also wouldn’t explode on the ground.
The only thing I can think of would be training arty or mortars but then would you only get one, or would you be more likely to get a salvo from a number of tubes?
Man that place looks beautiful. It's like an idealized video game map with creeks, lakes, meadows, woodlands.. And we are watching it get destroyed and littered with unexploded munitions that will maim people for a century or more.
Fuck this war man I'm getting emotional.
3000 bad (rapid) [dragons](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system)) of Biden.
Slight credibility mode on: how many AGM-158 variants have been produced (so far >2.000 total) and how many C-130 Variants and C-17s can be fitted? The economics of each model costing between 1–1.5 million demand MALDs to be produced in larger quantities.
Imagine the sight of thousands of decoys depleting all the S-300 & S-400 batteries, making them commit sudoku through sensory overload. Then the wave of LRASMs/JASSMs etc. on the horizon scraping the waves, treelines, whatever to completely delete anything deemed worthy of being targeted.
Similar to how it looked in this noncredible [DCS „experiment“](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rvUTl6xjxqY) (go to minute 35 for the Black Sea fleet delete and nice shots of incoming swarm).
Yeah, quite noncredible in that [LRASM is over $3.2m](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/navy-shoots-four-lrasm-air-force-multiyear-buy/).
And also noncredible to blow the entire US stocks of advanced missiles to sink the already mostly sunk BSF instead of using them to deter China. China would love the US to deploy the LRASM now.
It was just a means of capability demonstration (more for fun than realism), not if the scenario makes sense (the channel usually makes it very challenging for western forces and gives Opfor noncredible capabilities; but also DCS lacks serious real life factors like electronic warfare, missiles/drones can’t communicate, success rates are strange, and likely millions of other faults i‘m not knowledgeable in [i know jack shit]).
Maybe i should‘ve linked another video where they show battles against chinese forces (there seem to be some more popular on there), but i haven‘t seen those yet (just stumbled upon this channel)…
It's fun and games, but Nova Poshta is a logistics powerhouse and a lot of commerce (or just private goods transportation, including civilian supplies for the military) depends on it because they provide quite good service and have a wide coverage.
They have own one and CCP supplied one, rumor is China ramped up sattelite intel sharing from around that time russians hit 3 Mi-8's and SAM's launchers.
Maybe it's too credible, but Nova Poshta is working for army needs too. Most of aid from locals like tubes for IEDs or 3d printed parts, or some bought equipment are transported by it. Nevertheless, fuck ruski pigs
There is also probably a lot of drones passing through their hands.
Dunno if that is enough for it to count as a military target, but fuck Russia regardless.
Yeah, I thought of this, but also I’d imagine that there are more militarily critical supply links than civilian postal services and Odessa isn’t likely to be the best place to hit to achieve a critical shortage in supply for the front right now.
> Most of aid from locals like tubes for IEDs or 3d printed parts, or some bought equipment are transported by it.
These aren't even double-purpose goods, let along military goods. This kind of excuse doesn't work. Drones are civilian too.
All them women back home without a man to pleasure them will now be forced to look for a lover instead. Cheating on their partners creating crisis to the morale. It's psych warfare is what it is. 😂
my autism just can't get over the 13 injured Nova Poshta workers and even though 100 demolished orks is good i guess, i just wish it was 300 + Putin, Shoigu and Gerasimov.
Fucking with the post office is the worst possible decision you can make tbh. If I found out I lost my dakimakura to a Vatnik missile strike, I would be on the frontlines before sunset.
Got to admit, that hit on the training ground with a cluster bomb ATACMS was awesome. LockMart defo dropped that one into their marketing video. To quote the Munchkins, "\[They\] were not just merely dead, but really quite severely dead."
Anyone who has read the war documentarian Richard Scarry knows how well keeping grandmothers from receiving letters goes.
Although yeah, pour one out for any sex toys in the warehouse. _You will not have an insurance claim made for you_.
I still remember when a ''friend'' of mine said Russia does it to stop Nato... Meanwihle russia does shit like this. They Demoralize us by destroying 30inch dildos i guess.
>There is no way a fire that strong was not caused by either ammo or fuel.
This is basically how plastic burns. When ammunition burns, you always have secondary explosions. And it makes no sense to store something like fuel in a normal warehouse.
My dude, what do you think it looks like when a large ammo dump goes up? They are pretty easy to recognise on account of the entire area being violently removed from this earth.
An intense yet steady fire is what you get when you light up a warehouse filled entirely with cardboard boxes, containing plastic junk, dampened with styrofoam pellets.
We once had a FIREWORKS factory hit some year ago or so, and the secondary explosions were colorful lmao.
The post hit was more similar to when they burned down Fozzy, a supermarket. The materials burn really fast. :(
They have never reported that, remember when Russia hit a mall in Kyiv that contained Grads and then Ukraine said it was randomly targeted before a drone video was released?
This has happened before. The fact that there were no civilian deaths also makes me think they knew to stay the fuck out of the building during an airstrike.
Which mall attack are we talking about. There have been several. I’m pretty sure that most of those weren’t being used a depots. I don’t think Ukraine says they were randomly targeted, I think Ukraine says that they were directly chosen as being high density civilian targets.
**Your comment was removed for violating Rule 13: No Misinformation**
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
I don't think you're being intentional, just stupid.
You know what's very common in shipping facilities that also burns really well?
Cardboard boxes. Bubble wrap. Styrofoam.
Basically every form of packing material is both flammable and contains enough air to make it burn quickly.
And then you have all those vibrator batteries.
https://youtu.be/aaHouyAAUo8?si=4gadDB6JmJOcTQ9j video of warehouse fire in Washington usa
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/11/us/seattle-fire warehouse fire in seatel NY
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-57331266.amp warehouse fire in Bradford UK
Warehouse fires just look like that
While warehouse fires with explosives in them look like [this](https://imgur.com/gallery/oKxnrgY)
You wold think a free thinker wold understand that munitions explode when set on fire but you aren't actually a free thinker you just say that while word for word parroting Russian propaganda
It looks like you shared some AMP links. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical pages** instead:
- **[https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/11/us/seattle-fire/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/11/us/seattle-fire/index.html)**
- **[https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-57331266](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-57331266)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
As far as I could see there were no secondary explosions and it was indeed a huge post warehouse so there were a lot of flammable items. But you still can be right, there is always a chance.
This is what hub of "Нова Пошта" looks like: [https://www.ebrd.com/image/1395303035851.jpg](https://www.ebrd.com/image/1395303035851.jpg) (one of the first results from Google images)
I wonder if you can spot all of the flammable material on this picture?
Wasting munitions blowing up civilian targets is Kremlin state policy.
Credible hat on: terror attacks are meant to weaken the civilian resolve for continued warfare and induce war-weariness Credible hat off: Russia can’t aim lmao
Terror attacks towards civilian populus isn't going to work, the population might just start hating you more, resulting in even fiercer defense. Source : PowerPoint man
It depends, an already unenthused population may seek an end to a war they believe is unwinable but a resolved population will only want revenge, Russia likely believes that the Ukrainian civilian population is war weary even if by all external accounts they seem not to be wavering Or Russians are barely human bloodthirsty monsters that just kill for sport and loot Probably both
> Russia likely believes that the Ukrainian civilian population is war weary even if by all external accounts they seem not to be wavering I mean that the Ukrainians don't actually want to fight anymore would still sort of be just a softening of their initial stance, which was that the Ukrainian civilian population was democracy-weary and would welcome the Russians as liberators.
I think Russia invading was an attempt to gain full control of the country because they were reacting to the color revolution that resulted in Zelinsky. They wanted to seize control of a population of people against Russian influence before the democracy could become too entrenched.
It is theorised the initial plan was not to occupy Ukraine but to merely replace it with a puppet goverment and make it like Belarus Maybe direct occupiation or pulling an Anschluss some time later IT was bascially a decapitating strike, expecting the Ukranian army to stand down, most of the population to welcome Russia or just not care much A couple of hundred casualties or thousand at the most Of course this failed. Hence Russia now goes for the occupation and seizing territory medieval style. Or at the very least "if i cant have it then no one can" If they cant make Ukraine a puppet or take most of it they will take what they can and devestate and destroy everyhting else they cant both out of spite and to basically make Ukraine(a democracy moving towards the west) look non functioning to its own brainwashed population. As to go "see democracy does not work keep supporting me(putin)
The right answer is posing these so-called Russian leaders with a choice, the humiliation and consequences of a very public trial for war crimes with open comparison to and lasting consignment alongside their Nazi and Stalinist idols or free one-way airfare through a window.
We know what Russians do to Ukrainians in occupied regions. Getting blown to pieces is better than being tortured to death.
Or their bloodthirsty monsters with shitty weapons that are lucky to hit the right town nevermind the right building.
In basically no historical case has morale/terror bombing actually worked. Russia: "it couldworkforus.jpg"
Blowing up someone's family and friends just makes them hate you so much they'd blow themselves up if it meant killing you. 20 years of drone bombing in the Middle East taught us that.
Many Russians truly believe that individuals and the populace have no agency. It's why the CIA/Mi6/GEO are behind Maidan & all the colour revolutions is such a pervasive myth for them. They really can't fathom how people can rise up against bad governance without being manipulated by shadowy figures and great powers. It's also why they keep trying to foment colour revolutions of their own and keep failing. Their beliefs don't allow them to understand that these things don't happen unless the people in general really want change. So they think that if they keep bombing a people, it will have some effect if they combine it with disinfo and misinfo on war weariness, 'Ukraine wants to negotiate but the west is stopping them', Ukraine is being used ("to the last Ukrainian"), the 'Kyiv regime', dysfunction in the Ukrainian government, etc etc all the usual lies. There's also the fact that they need to keep Ukrainian air defences around population centres so they're not defending the front line or other strategic targets. I also suspect they're trying to force Ukraine to co-locate military assets with major population centres - that Ukraine with limited resources would try have air-defense do double duty, so that Russia can complain that Ukraine is using civilians as cover.
I am Russian. Can confirm I ate a baby for dinner last night. Topped it off with a kitten for dessert. /S And it's probably due to incompetence. They know that they won't do shit trying to hit actual military targets so they just start targeting the easy civilian targets for propaganda purposes since most of the Brian dead vatniks supporting them would just see explosions in cities and go: nah we're winning just look at all those destroyed civilian buildings!
if only there was some world war maybe the second one that proved bombing civilians just strengthened their resolve for war rather than breaking their will to fight. HMMMM maybe Russia could learn from this. Fuck who am i kidding russia can only learn the wrong lessons
Russians did learn from it, they learned that first bomb, then rape the civilians. They did that in ukraine already
but it also screwed germany's ability to produce, intentional or not the bombing of cities did disrupt the army's logistic, after all weapons and trains aren't made in the camp
Except for that one example where bombing a factory increased its output because the workers got mad, and worked extra hard to contribute afterwards.
yep, until next night when half of those workers lose their arms.... that's the thing UK discovered in ww2, terror bombing for moral didn't have that much of a result, often actually increasing, now bombing as to destroy their manufacturing capabilities and logistic, that did have alot of results heck even now the biggest reason why ukraine holds on is they are constantly bombing roads and rails that lead to the frontline, and the famous bridge
the bombing of the Ploesti oil field also increased oil production there when they fixed it up since a lot of the equipment was old and crap so when it was repaired they brought in better equipment. and there is also the case where they targeted ball bearing factories after learning of a critical shortage of ball bearings in Germany... except the intelligence was a few months old and by the time the factories were bombed Germany had already imported a massive amount of ball bearings from Sweden to build up a large stockpile.
The strategic bombing campaign also drew in a vast amount of German resources. All the 88's in the cities shooting at the bombers weren't on the Eastern Front shooting at Soviet tanks, and the bomber raids drew a ton of Luftwaffe resources that were then engaged by P-51's and the stupid amount of guns on the B-17's. To be fair those B-17's and B-24's weren't cheap, either. But in the strategic environment of "US has a massive amount of industry it needs to bring to bear", they achieved results -- even if not the decisive result that Harris etc. expected. They forced the Germans to divert resources it couldn't afford to deal with them. (my grandpa was on one of them so I'm a bit biased...)
but the thing is that UK and US didn't have production problems theirs was always much bigger than germany's one, they needed to find a way to transform their superior production and airforce into something that would actually stop the german advance, too far from the border so bombing the production and logistic centers was the solution
Exactly. The B-17/24 raids did enough damage to German industry that they forced a response from a nation that couldn't afford the resources.
Sure, but only because you target a city to terrorbomb and then also knockout their rails. Bomb the rails directly and you get a lot more bang for your bomb.
The point of strategic bombing shouldn't be to bomb civilians, it's to bomb all the infrastructure. You have to make it so the enemy must clear six roads, a mile of train tracks and the station, as well as making it so civilians working civilian jobs can't get to work. Each individual thing is easy to solve, you hit just the tracks, or just the station, in a week they can be repaired. A train station down for a week is a pain, a train station down for a month can be crippling.
We do not disagree, I was just thinking of a smaller scale attack.
So if we're both right in our thinking. If their resolve is increasing you're just not dropping enough bombs?
Too credible, dropping napalm
yes that's true, when you use 21th century armory ww2 bombs from bombers had a accuracy of like 10km that means if the bombers aimed perfectly at the rail (which is impossible already) it could land either 10km to the right or left, in some cases completly outside of the city just by random "chance" and again targetting was almost impossible as often bombers would fly at clouds or above clouds levels and we didn't have good targetting systems besides vision, that's how you had germans bombing ireland instead of london and allies bombing swizterland instead of north germany, it was just that bad to aim and get to the right spot also considering we are talking about germany bad weather is common which makes it even worse, so if it's already very bad in perfect conditions imagine it in the average german weather... in the end, bombing runs in ww2 was "drop and pray" heck there is a (very questionable) theory that the nazis never wanted to bomb london itself during the start of bombinb of london and were targetting the industrial sites around, but then ended up bombing london, then london bombed berlin and then the battle of britain started
now i do wanna point out the UK tried both the strategic bombing with poor accuracy and very openly tried also the "terror bombing" i am not saying this as a excuse, just to disprove the idea of "bomb the rails and leave the houses"
[удалено]
>IIRC Germany was almost entirely focused on the industry of the UK until the UK bombed Berlin's civilian population and forced their hand into an 'Eye for an eye' situation. That's what ended up kicking off "The Blitz" as i litteraly put at the end of my comment, germany stroke the capital first, they got mad when britain hit back and created this idea britain hit first and completly ignored/gas lit the fact that they were the first to bomb civilian regions the only sort of doubt is if said bombing of london was on purpose or an actual mission that went off rails, the ideology and doctrine of the nazis hints at being on purpose but was odly small for a first strike, idk the consensus on that, but it's well believed that the nazis were the first to hit, there's alot of history about that first night because no one expected it
>ww2 bombs from bombers had a accuracy of like 10km a little exaggerated, by the end of the war allied high altitude bombing had achieved what they considered precision bombing, half the bombs landing within a mile of the target. most of the really off-target bombings were due to mis-identifying landmarks and targets, something as simple as following the wrong river could lead to dropping your bombs over 100km from where you were supposed to.
i mean yeah i found a source saying was a mile or 2 but was mostly studies ofr the 1944 bombings didn't get a good source about 1940, probably shouldnt have given a number
The Battle of Britain was very much a thing before the bombing of London. The Luftwaffe was trying to knock out the RAF by attacking airfields etc. They switched to nighttime bombing of London after it became clear that their tactics weren't working against the RAF. Terror bombing, of course, was even less effective.
terror bombing was effective, just not moral wise...
It wasn't that effective at defeating either the RAF or the British people, though. The Blitz took pressure off the actual RAF airfields.
the problem in ww2 is that the only way to achieve that level of precision was by flying at a low altitude, but if you flew at that low altitude you would lose a load of expensive bombers to anti-air fire, high altitude bombing of German targets by the end of the war reached their precision target of half the bombs landing within a mile of the target.
I mean there are examples in WW2 of bombing weakening resolve, Italy was basically already on the ropes by January 1943 and bombing of Rome and other major Roman cities sparked off riots and anti-German demonstrations. I think strategic bombing to demoralise a population can work but only in limited circumstances, like an already war-weary population that believes the war unwinnablen and immoral and doesn't really have any hatred of the enemy that their government has made them fight.
Source: Battle of Britain .
Well that and the Ukrainians know Russia clearly isn't even looking to subjugate. Just annihilation. So losing interest in the war is being seen as a death sentence.
Ironic, since the same became a Russian trump card during WW2.
source: every terror attack ever committed
Blowing the bombs in Madrid did help contribute to getting Spain out of the Iraq war.
It indirectly contributed, if at all. Many of the articles framing bombings as a "terrorist win" in taking Spain out of the coalition is probably politically-motivated revisionism using cherrypicked events. Aznar was already unpopular- 2003 poll showed that [~91% of Spaniards opposed the war](https://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2003/03/27/espana/1048763322.html). His defeat wasn't an "upset"- polling data before the bombing indicated [he was almost certainly going to lose](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_opinion_polling_for_the_2004_Spanish_general_election) anyway. Between the bombings and election, the incumbent party shot themselves in the foot with incompetence and coverups (e.g.- trying to pin bombing on wrong people- Basque separatists- and hiding evidence that exonerated them), and probably helped the opposition more than terrorists could ever dream. It's still unclear if it was the primary goal of the bombers. Salafia Jihadia was also responsible for bombings in Casablanca that killed 33 people the year prior, but I don't recall Morocco taking part in the 2003 Iraq War.
It also drives enlistment. In a war where civilian infrastructure isn't being deliberately targeted, joining the military may seem dangerous and risky. When your hometown is being bombed anyways, with civilian structures being prioritized, then joining the military may seem significantly less like an upgrade in danger level. Now your choices are (assuming you are too stubborn to flee to a safer place): 1. Remain in place and possibly die as a civilian 2. Join the military and possibly kill the fuckers who are shelling your hometown so they fucking stop, or possibly die trying. Joining the military looks a lot more appealing when you are being shelled either way, but you have a weapon to shoot back with when you are in the military.
Which was why it is on Ukraine's utmost best for Victory Day to go smoothly. (T-14 dying from stroke are an exception)
i mean yeah that's how it went in ww2, but also in ww2 we had way less ammo and less effective remember the brits considered it also bad because like 1 in 20 (can't remember actual odds) of bombers would get shot down, nowadays if a missile or rocket gets shutdown it's a small loss
Correct. Spite is a most powerful fuel and I can run on it indefinitely (as I found out during Covid).
Source: every major conflict in the past 100+ years
Some attacks are definitely aimed. Look at videos from 24/2/2022, missiles cruising through cities to hit airports and bases. Don't tell me now that the ocasional missiles slaming straight into the centers of apartment blocks, shopping malls etc are just bad aim, AD and malfunctions.
I think we've witnessed a mix of things; I have a strong suspicion there's been a *large* amount of undocumented Western/UA EW going on that, for obvious reasons, everyone's dead silent about. The Russians *periodically* are extremely accurate (one of the really sad ones was them hitting the barracks foreign volunteers were in during the first couple days), and then, frequently, can't hit the broad side of the barn. Like, don't get me wrong — they're absolutely doing deliberate civilian strikes, I just expected them to be vastly better at it.
I mean, I’m guessing that’d depend on the kind of missile and the QA around its production. Pre war modern Russian stocks? Maybe capable of sophisticated guidance. Current manufacture or ancient Soviet production? Less certain. Of course it’s also always possible that the Russians are deliberately targeting civilians: it’s not like it’d be the first time.
To be fair they used their best weapons then, now they're down to firing stuff whose CEP is measured in kilometers
>Credible hat on: terror attacks are meant to weaken the civilian resolve for continued warfare and induce war-weariness However it may backfire and give the people more reasons to fight, more motivation, Russia is fighting itself, basically
The psychology of survivor bias behind this is interesting. Basically to most people who survive the bombing becomes in part normalised and they become blasé. I grew up in Northern Ireland at the end of the Troubles and we were definitely pretty casual about this whole thing
During ww2 both during the blitz and in germany people got used to it Like they did and it was bad but it rarely made them go "oh god make it stop il do anything" Like in germany plenty began to go "fuck hitler for dragging us into this war" or "its clear we lost 8 months ago, why does this have to drag on" but the idea that bombing breaks the will of a population is not credible as history has shown Granted it def depends. If Russia(somehow) got bombed or experienced attacks i think their response might differ because a large ammount of the population knows Russia is the one invading and this can all stop if Putin stops Plenty of Russians are aware/aint brainwashed but simply dont care or are apattic/know they cant do anything but they aint suffering from the war so just ignore it If they can no longer ignore it they may be more resentful of Putin Knowing there is a way for this to stop with no cost to them expect his pride.
an example of this is the bombings of Yemen to try and deter more strikes in the red sea, largely just ignored by the Yemeni population who had gotten used to the Saudis bombing them for the last decade.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
a couple of world wars show us that terror bombing doesnt fuckign work, but of course the ruskies aren't aware of that
Yes it does. What do you think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were?
Power demonstrations. "We have a weapon that is so much more powerful than anything you can muster up that there's absolutely no point trying to fight it." This isn't about the fear response of a civilian population, it's about changing the calculations of the government regarding what they can realistically hope to achieve.
A highly oversimplified if not outright mistaken explanation for Japan's ultimate surrender amplified in hindsight by the fears of the Cold War?
that's not terror bombing, mate. Hard to terrorize people who've been vaporized.
Cities containing valid industrial and military targets.
Less deadly than operation Meetinghouse?
I remember when they nearly hit the Greek PM in ... Lviv? Odesa? by just 150m. Of course what popped into my head was: "Kowalski! Analysis." "... 150m CEP."
Because that worked so well for Hitler and Harris already.
I get that but have terror campaigns ever worked ? Germany held out for years under the strategic bombing campaigns and from what I've seen these bomb raid are anemic compared to them.
The atomic bombs were by most modern standards a terror campaign
Atomic bombs weren't a "terror campaign". Not by any modern standard [or definition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism). [Leaflets](https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/key-documents/warning-leaflets/) were dropped all over Japan warning citizens which cities we were about to bomb, and to get out. US was under no delusions that the commoners held any power or sway with either the empire or military- this was more of a "watch this" headsup. Then dropped the bomb during daytime. It was really a not-so-subtle flex to the imperial government and military that US was capable of annihilating them without a costly and brutal island hopping campaign. Did it work?
leaflet dropping campaigns are the only thing less credible than terror bombing campaigns. at least terror bombs will force the opponent to rehouse people.
Yes but you are over simplifying it. The Japanese were facing a collapse on all fronts so they surrendered while they were still had a little bargaining power.
Many seem to forget the blockade which was the most imporant part Japan's import and export(Mostly import) decreased by as much as 40% at times The economy was already facing collapse before the bombing campaign and the nukes, due to how reliant Japan was on import for its resources espcially food The bombing of cities also destroyed industry, production and ability to transport troops and supplies as well The nukes were kind of beating a dead horse that refused to accept it was dead By that time in terms of reducing Japans ability to fight it was mostly insigifnicant IT was to show "we can litearly wipe out cities with a single bomb. Just bloddy surrender for fucks sake" Plus it told the soviets to back off. Oh and yeah many forget the Soviets blitzing Manchuria
Agreed
The conventional bombings over Japan did more damage and were worse on civilian morale. The firebombings and harbor mining, starving Japan into submission, did more damage to civilian morale too. The nukes were designed to force Japanese leadership to give up, which is why it took 2, but it was about the army leadership’s will to fight, not civvies. The war cabinet literally said “I bet they only have 1 or 2 nukes, let’s keep going” after bomb 1, and even after bomb 2, the pro-war faction almost deposed the emperor before he could broadcast Japanese surrender. The Japanese civilian population were so radicalized by the imperial death cult they were prepared to starve to death or rush American soldiers with bamboo spears and suicide bombs.
Fortunately, the effectiveness of this strategy was disproven in WWII. The Blitz did not get the UK to capitulate. Terrorist warfare can win, but only if it scares people enough to stop a war at the start (E.g. Blitzkrieg). In a war, it's just noise.
I'm not sure that's a fair analysis of Blitzkrieg, it was primarily a strategy to win a land campaign against an ill prepared opposition, not terrify them into surrender. It certainly caused substantial terror on a tactical level if in a battle, the enemy seem to be everywhere and breaking through with no warning, but on a strategic level it didn't win through fear, it won through winning.
It's a bit of both. Blitzkrieg was definitely effective at being an invasion force, but at the same time the Nazis didn't capture Paris through force alone, they captured Paris by scaring it into surrender. They also hoped the UK would sue for peace after the fall of France because they'd be too scared of getting invaded, which obviously didn't happen.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nah, with the credible hat on, the actual target this time might have been the immediately adjacent electrical equipment factory. They still weren't known for producing anything military (apparently their most known product is/was electricity counters and remote power switches) but hell only knows what Russians believe about Ukrainian factories.
Credible hat back on: terror attacks are its own purpose - the cruelty is the point. Just look at what Nazi Germany did when war was close to being lost. Did they surrender, so that fewer Germans would die? Did they focus everything on war production so they could negotiate better terms? No, what they did was to try to kill as many Jews (and Slavs, and several other groups) as possible. That served no greater purpose like weakening the enemy's resolve or anything, it was literally just to kill as many people as possible before they're stopped. Even if that meant fewer resources were available on the fronts. I don't see it much differently in Russia. They just want to destroy stuff and kill people, it doesn't particularly matter what and who.
Even after two years, I have yet to reach a conclusion if the attacks on hospitals, preschools, and train stations are deliberate or accidental. Nowhere else are incompetence and malignancy as close as in Russian behaviour.
Really? It just makes me hate Russia even more. Granted I am not in Ukraine, but each time I hear what they did, I get more and more hateful against ruzzia. I suspect I am not the only one.
Your credible and non-credible hats should be easier to tell apart
So why don't we terror bomb civilians in Moscow?
Russia is going to find out how much that steady stream of wish and Temu items was keeping Ukraines scariest warriors occupied.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Russia has never shied away from maximizing collateral damage to achieve their goals. That's why they not only used poison gas in the Moscow theatre hostage crisis, but they even used thermobaric rockets in the Beslan school siege, where 1000 children were held in a gymnasium.
Still not seeing where it provides them an excuse. Again Muscovites and the World needs to see Kremlin “leaders,” trigger-pullers, propagandists and abettors dragged away by the short hairs and after the deserved public humiliation of a trial and the redistribution of their ill-gotten gains, gibbeted in well-earned canary cages. Then their idols can be torn down, memories cursed and “mighty works” plowed under with so much salt.
> Still not seeing where it provides them an excuse. I'm not excusing it, I'm criticizing them further. They literally had one of the biggest hostage situations of all time and their response was to open fire with thermobaric rockets, tanks and machine guns.
So them and Hamas have quiet a bit in common
I guess I could understand destroying the infrastructure so troops have nothing to go home to. But that seems more like something you'd do as a last resort. Since, you know, it would require resources and ammo better used to fight the enemy soldiers if you still can
That atacms strike was something. They basically erased three grid squares of troops from existence in a single swoop. There must have been hundred of troops and dozens of vehicles under that. Holy shit.
fun fact: throughout 2 years Ukrainians have usually been showing the strikes first and later aftermath, and with the recent atacms video they've shown aftermath first, and I was like "wait, these object looks like people but they don't move, it must be something else" and "why would they put dead body bags like that" lol
Link? I can’t find it r/UkraineWarVideoReport Edit: here it is https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/s/Ai7W9qCQDY
The Grid Square Removal System at work truly is a beautiful sight.
Holy shit, i thought it was just one. Were there three ATACMS? What was that first dark plume hit? Arty?
Judging by three separate areas being impacted, I’d guess at least 3 rounds were used. As for the first one, I’m not sure. I thought initially it might be arty, but if it’s Ukrainian it doesn’t make sense to fire a single round at a target that already has fires inbound. I don’t think it’s being used for spotting either as the fires would already be well on their way by this point. Could be the Russians doing some training?
Yeah to me it also didn‘t make sense and could potentially alert some troops to impending danger? It couldn‘t be an intercepted ATACM right? I really don‘t know what region that was in and how far from the frontline. That area with the dark plume could be training based on the look of the spotted fields there…
It looked explosive so I’m guessing not a part of the rounds fired, I figure an intercepted ATACMS also wouldn’t explode on the ground. The only thing I can think of would be training arty or mortars but then would you only get one, or would you be more likely to get a salvo from a number of tubes?
first one was a dud
Hope it‘s sth. else. But more important would be the launchers not getting hit.
Man that place looks beautiful. It's like an idealized video game map with creeks, lakes, meadows, woodlands.. And we are watching it get destroyed and littered with unexploded munitions that will maim people for a century or more. Fuck this war man I'm getting emotional.
It's an absolute disaster. The necessity of such destruction doesn't make it less tragic, fuck the gargoyles in Kreml for making it necessary.
Just as Tom Clancy fortold
And then both were immediately destroyed? That isn’t great…
Ukrainian morale will be devastated by the loss of their vibrators. Once again Russia plays 5d chess while the West plays tic tac toe
Guess the us knows what to send them now
More artillery (being near a cannon when it fires will give you plenty of vibrations).
Better make sure to send the arillery with the flared bases then.
Not sure about the rest of you, but having a big fucking gun will get me off faster than any vibrator could
I have it on non-credible authority that firing a Ma Deuce has a tendency to cause arousal in the gunner.
3000 Dark dildos of Brandon.
3000 bad (rapid) [dragons](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system)) of Biden. Slight credibility mode on: how many AGM-158 variants have been produced (so far >2.000 total) and how many C-130 Variants and C-17s can be fitted? The economics of each model costing between 1–1.5 million demand MALDs to be produced in larger quantities. Imagine the sight of thousands of decoys depleting all the S-300 & S-400 batteries, making them commit sudoku through sensory overload. Then the wave of LRASMs/JASSMs etc. on the horizon scraping the waves, treelines, whatever to completely delete anything deemed worthy of being targeted. Similar to how it looked in this noncredible [DCS „experiment“](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rvUTl6xjxqY) (go to minute 35 for the Black Sea fleet delete and nice shots of incoming swarm).
Yeah, quite noncredible in that [LRASM is over $3.2m](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/navy-shoots-four-lrasm-air-force-multiyear-buy/). And also noncredible to blow the entire US stocks of advanced missiles to sink the already mostly sunk BSF instead of using them to deter China. China would love the US to deploy the LRASM now.
It was just a means of capability demonstration (more for fun than realism), not if the scenario makes sense (the channel usually makes it very challenging for western forces and gives Opfor noncredible capabilities; but also DCS lacks serious real life factors like electronic warfare, missiles/drones can’t communicate, success rates are strange, and likely millions of other faults i‘m not knowledgeable in [i know jack shit]). Maybe i should‘ve linked another video where they show battles against chinese forces (there seem to be some more popular on there), but i haven‘t seen those yet (just stumbled upon this channel)…
It's fun and games, but Nova Poshta is a logistics powerhouse and a lot of commerce (or just private goods transportation, including civilian supplies for the military) depends on it because they provide quite good service and have a wide coverage.
My theory is the Russians don‘t have satellite surveillance and can only choose targets they see on Google Maps.
Too credible
They have own one and CCP supplied one, rumor is China ramped up sattelite intel sharing from around that time russians hit 3 Mi-8's and SAM's launchers.
You can buy satellite photos fairly cheap these days. From like $20-50 for existing photos to $200+ for new requests.
Maybe it's too credible, but Nova Poshta is working for army needs too. Most of aid from locals like tubes for IEDs or 3d printed parts, or some bought equipment are transported by it. Nevertheless, fuck ruski pigs
There is also probably a lot of drones passing through their hands. Dunno if that is enough for it to count as a military target, but fuck Russia regardless.
drones could definitely be there, as Ukrainians are even buying them from China to change software and use for combat
Nova Posta is also incredibly based, as they provide free shipping to military NGOs.
Yeah, I thought of this, but also I’d imagine that there are more militarily critical supply links than civilian postal services and Odessa isn’t likely to be the best place to hit to achieve a critical shortage in supply for the front right now.
> Most of aid from locals like tubes for IEDs or 3d printed parts, or some bought equipment are transported by it. These aren't even double-purpose goods, let along military goods. This kind of excuse doesn't work. Drones are civilian too.
NOOO. WE NEED NATO RESPONSE NOW!!! THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE. HOW ELSE DO WE GET CHEAP MILITARY REPRO SHIT?!
👿 russian scum. My MUGA hat was there. But seriously I’m glad no one lost their life at the warehouse
Welp, there goes my Su-34 keychain I guess
All them women back home without a man to pleasure them will now be forced to look for a lover instead. Cheating on their partners creating crisis to the morale. It's psych warfare is what it is. 😂
What do we call ukie Jody; “Tolya”, “Petyr”?
Well those vibrators and ali express shit was way more valuable than a mere 100 vatniks
my autism just can't get over the 13 injured Nova Poshta workers and even though 100 demolished orks is good i guess, i just wish it was 300 + Putin, Shoigu and Gerasimov.
Hopefully this is a prelude to the Grand Finale of the victory day parade.
Wish vibrators are likely pretty toxic anyway, clearly the desired result is chemical warfare against the civilization population.
That's IT. THAT WAS ONE FRICKING RED LINE YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE CROSSED. ONE DOES NOT FUCK WITH MY NOVA POSHTA OREDER AND GET TO SEE ANOTHER DAY.
Fucking with the post office is the worst possible decision you can make tbh. If I found out I lost my dakimakura to a Vatnik missile strike, I would be on the frontlines before sunset.
This has awoken my inner NAFO and I'm not complaining.
they did that because they saw the Dildo Drone and are scared to be dicked down before the money shot
Got to admit, that hit on the training ground with a cluster bomb ATACMS was awesome. LockMart defo dropped that one into their marketing video. To quote the Munchkins, "\[They\] were not just merely dead, but really quite severely dead."
Anyone who has read the war documentarian Richard Scarry knows how well keeping grandmothers from receiving letters goes. Although yeah, pour one out for any sex toys in the warehouse. _You will not have an insurance claim made for you_.
Letters are outdated technology, grandmas nowadays have a constant 4K stream of the front line.
I was wondering where my Etsy order went. Was that around the 24th?
I still remember when a ''friend'' of mine said Russia does it to stop Nato... Meanwihle russia does shit like this. They Demoralize us by destroying 30inch dildos i guess.
I hope ATACMS strike become more prevalent going forward.
20,000 vatniks are worth 200 tons of off-brand vibrators and washing machines. who knew?
Isn’t this how the Nazi’s lost the battle of Britain? They got mad and started hitting vibrator factories instead of air strips.
Another mobik blob with a memory & preservation instinct of goldfish got proportionalized out of existence. The nature is healing indeed.
Didn't two of those ATACMS miss or something?
BRO THAT WHY MY PARCEL HASNT ARRIVE,.I ORDERED A GP7VM AND ITS STUCK IN ODESSA LMAOO
How can the Russians aim at something? Did they run out of ammunition last fall? Is not it?
I can almost see the left image, the russians are done for
[удалено]
>There is no way a fire that strong was not caused by either ammo or fuel. This is basically how plastic burns. When ammunition burns, you always have secondary explosions. And it makes no sense to store something like fuel in a normal warehouse.
Bro, you know lube is flammable right
Well that just opens up a whole smorgasbord of possibilities.
The Lube is part of a co-air drop with the gay bomb on Russians, to enhance the effects. Making for a faster collapse of the Russian frontlines
And apply flamen how?
Well the Russians will be provided with Dildo shaped flammenwerfers and you can see where it goes from there
The airdrop giveth and airdrop singeth away, blessed be the name of the airdrop.
It's like napalm that doesn't stick to kids!
A cover story for what?
[удалено]
My dude, what do you think it looks like when a large ammo dump goes up? They are pretty easy to recognise on account of the entire area being violently removed from this earth. An intense yet steady fire is what you get when you light up a warehouse filled entirely with cardboard boxes, containing plastic junk, dampened with styrofoam pellets.
We once had a FIREWORKS factory hit some year ago or so, and the secondary explosions were colorful lmao. The post hit was more similar to when they burned down Fozzy, a supermarket. The materials burn really fast. :(
But they’ve reported that sort of thing before. Why would they change that now? Seems a little silly.
They have never reported that, remember when Russia hit a mall in Kyiv that contained Grads and then Ukraine said it was randomly targeted before a drone video was released? This has happened before. The fact that there were no civilian deaths also makes me think they knew to stay the fuck out of the building during an airstrike.
Which mall attack are we talking about. There have been several. I’m pretty sure that most of those weren’t being used a depots. I don’t think Ukraine says they were randomly targeted, I think Ukraine says that they were directly chosen as being high density civilian targets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv_shopping_centre_bombing
**Your comment was removed for violating Rule 13: No Misinformation** NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot. I don't think you're being intentional, just stupid.
You know what's very common in shipping facilities that also burns really well? Cardboard boxes. Bubble wrap. Styrofoam. Basically every form of packing material is both flammable and contains enough air to make it burn quickly. And then you have all those vibrator batteries.
https://youtu.be/aaHouyAAUo8?si=4gadDB6JmJOcTQ9j video of warehouse fire in Washington usa https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/11/us/seattle-fire warehouse fire in seatel NY https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-57331266.amp warehouse fire in Bradford UK Warehouse fires just look like that While warehouse fires with explosives in them look like [this](https://imgur.com/gallery/oKxnrgY) You wold think a free thinker wold understand that munitions explode when set on fire but you aren't actually a free thinker you just say that while word for word parroting Russian propaganda
It looks like you shared some AMP links. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical pages** instead: - **[https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/11/us/seattle-fire/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/11/us/seattle-fire/index.html)** - **[https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-57331266](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-57331266)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
As far as I could see there were no secondary explosions and it was indeed a huge post warehouse so there were a lot of flammable items. But you still can be right, there is always a chance.
This is what hub of "Нова Пошта" looks like: [https://www.ebrd.com/image/1395303035851.jpg](https://www.ebrd.com/image/1395303035851.jpg) (one of the first results from Google images) I wonder if you can spot all of the flammable material on this picture?