One of the targets was the headquarters of the SBU, the notorious CIA-allied 'intelligence' service that killed one of the non-country's own negotiators in the streets of Kiev.
My question is: why on earth was the SBU not targeted on Day 1?
Because Russia didn't think it needed to. The russian leadership thought they'd win a quick victory. After they bogged down in March, they started firing a lot of cruise missiles, but it was too late as UKR targets had dispersed and the fixed targets were empty. The fact that the UKR air force wasn't destroyed on the ground is all you need to know about how utterly incompetent Russia was and is.
Russia is also fighting a propaganda war, and knows that the more it goes after cities and civilians, the more Ukraine can use this to appeal for more and more aid and get more and more attention from Western media. Russia's game plan has been to hope that the West gets bored of Ukraine and moves on.
The fact that UKR successfully took out the very expensive Kerch bridge caused Putin to tilt, and he violated his own strategy to order petty reprisal attacks on civilian areas, which is causing a huge propaganda coup in favor of Ukraine and against Russia this morning. The Western media and politicians are lit up and invigorated by the fresh Russian attacks on civilians.
That makes little sense. Even if I think that I "don't need to" do something, I'm still going to do it. You always have Plan B, especially if your Plan A is a highly unlikely to succeed coup de main.
The russian leadership thought they'd win a quick victory
You and others keep repeating this, but I don't think you can read minds.
The fact that UKR successfully took out the very expensive Kerch bridge caused Putin to tilt, and he violated his own strategy to order petty reprisal attacks on civilian areas
How ironic that you cheer a LR attack on a civilian target, which killed civilians, while complaining about Russia allegedly doing that.
which is causing a huge propaganda coup in favor of Ukraine and against Russia this morning.
As if. Propaganda doesn't win you the war. Most brain-dead NPCs made up their minds in the first day or so.
That makes little sense. Even if I think that I "don't need to" do something, I'm still going to do it. You always have Plan B, especially if your Plan A is a highly unlikely to succeed coup de main.
"Because we are too nice to fight seriously" or "we fight using anime rules where we purposely fight using a lower power level, then, when we lose, we "get serious" and unlock our full power level" makes a lot less sense than simple arrogance.
You and others keep repeating this, but I don't think you can read minds.
I can use logical deduction based on circumstantial evidence from their words and actions. In addition, the Russian military establishment has made statements that they intended to inflict a systemic collapse on the Ukrainian defense immediately before it could organize itself. This logic was used to defend the initial strategy.
How ironic that you cheer a LR attack on a civilian target, which killed civilians, while complaining about Russia allegedly doing that.
I don't know what LR means here. However, the Kerch bridge was in no way a "civilian target". It is a vital piece of Russian military infrastructure used to supply the Russian occupation of Crimea.
The fact that one or two civilian cars were in the blast radius is an unfortunate reality of war. The same would be true if a car happened to be nearby when HIMARS strikes hit the Antonivka Bridge. The big difference is that those civilian deaths were an unintended consequence of a strike on a strategic target, whereas with the Russian reprisals, the civilian deaths were the object and purpose of the strikes.
As if. Propaganda doesn't win you the war. Most brain-dead NPCs made up their minds in the first day or so.
It's highly likely that Putin's little tantrum will result in additional sanctions and/or military aid to Ukraine as a direct response. That's a meaningful self-own.
One of the targets was the headquarters of the SBU, the notorious CIA-allied 'intelligence' service that killed one of the non-country's own negotiators in the streets of Kiev.
My question is: why on earth was the SBU not targeted on Day 1?
Because Russia didn't think it needed to. The russian leadership thought they'd win a quick victory. After they bogged down in March, they started firing a lot of cruise missiles, but it was too late as UKR targets had dispersed and the fixed targets were empty. The fact that the UKR air force wasn't destroyed on the ground is all you need to know about how utterly incompetent Russia was and is.
Russia is also fighting a propaganda war, and knows that the more it goes after cities and civilians, the more Ukraine can use this to appeal for more and more aid and get more and more attention from Western media. Russia's game plan has been to hope that the West gets bored of Ukraine and moves on.
The fact that UKR successfully took out the very expensive Kerch bridge caused Putin to tilt, and he violated his own strategy to order petty reprisal attacks on civilian areas, which is causing a huge propaganda coup in favor of Ukraine and against Russia this morning. The Western media and politicians are lit up and invigorated by the fresh Russian attacks on civilians.
That makes little sense. Even if I think that I "don't need to" do something, I'm still going to do it. You always have Plan B, especially if your Plan A is a highly unlikely to succeed coup de main.
You and others keep repeating this, but I don't think you can read minds.
How ironic that you cheer a LR attack on a civilian target, which killed civilians, while complaining about Russia allegedly doing that.
As if. Propaganda doesn't win you the war. Most brain-dead NPCs made up their minds in the first day or so.
"Because we are too nice to fight seriously" or "we fight using anime rules where we purposely fight using a lower power level, then, when we lose, we "get serious" and unlock our full power level" makes a lot less sense than simple arrogance.
I can use logical deduction based on circumstantial evidence from their words and actions. In addition, the Russian military establishment has made statements that they intended to inflict a systemic collapse on the Ukrainian defense immediately before it could organize itself. This logic was used to defend the initial strategy.
I don't know what LR means here. However, the Kerch bridge was in no way a "civilian target". It is a vital piece of Russian military infrastructure used to supply the Russian occupation of Crimea.
The fact that one or two civilian cars were in the blast radius is an unfortunate reality of war. The same would be true if a car happened to be nearby when HIMARS strikes hit the Antonivka Bridge. The big difference is that those civilian deaths were an unintended consequence of a strike on a strategic target, whereas with the Russian reprisals, the civilian deaths were the object and purpose of the strikes.
It's highly likely that Putin's little tantrum will result in additional sanctions and/or military aid to Ukraine as a direct response. That's a meaningful self-own.
Not just Crimea, but the Southern Front. The route west from Donetsk is under the HIMARS fire from the north.