Ukraine has such panache!!

[blakeyboy]

From the FT, about the Crimea bridge explosion,  funniest paragraph of the week...:

 

"Ukraine has not claimed responsibility for the attack, though officials did post several comments mocking Russia on social media and the Ukrainian post office has issued a commemorative stamp."

 

Fantastic.

 

[Peckris 2]

Sadly, Putin is now bombing Kyiv as reprisal.

[Rob]

1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

Sadly, Putin is now bombing Kyiv as reprisal.

He hasn't stopped since the 24th Feb.

Maybe the bridge strike was a reprisal for the 11 killed in the missile strikes on Zaporizhzhia the day before............or maybe today was just another day demonstrating Russian SOP.

The most effective solution remains shipping body bags back to Moscow and St. Petersburg - in industrial quantities. It's the only thing that is going to make the general populace revolt. Hopefully they will deploy the recent conscripts in time for winter, as the system won't provide them with essentials.

Edited October 10, 2022 by Rob

[Peckris 2]

11 hours ago, Rob said:

He hasn't stopped since the 24th Feb.

Maybe the bridge strike was a reprisal for the 11 killed in the missile strikes on Zaporizhzhia the day before............or maybe today was just another day demonstrating Russian SOP.

Putin has hardly bothered with Kyiv since his 30 km column was halted in its tracks and severely damaged back in the early days. His main objective was the eastern strip which he still largely holds, i.e. the land bridge connecting Russia to the Crimea. I think (just a hunch, but one put forward by Western observers) that his initial push towards Kyiv was either "I'll have a go at that and see if I can get it" or "Kyiv will prove an irresistible bargaining tool if things don't go my way in the east".

I don't think they yet know what caused the bridge incident? It's a possible theory that it was an accident made worse by the adjacent train's explosive load. Ukraine denied responsibility which is very unusual. Certainly the missile strikes on Kyiv after the bridge event is Putin blaming Ukraine and venting his anger - I doubt there is any other reason for them.

[1949threepence]

58 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

Putin has hardly bothered with Kyiv since his 30 km column was halted in its tracks and severely damaged back in the early days. His main objective was the eastern strip which he still largely holds, i.e. the land bridge connecting Russia to the Crimea. I think (just a hunch, but one put forward by Western observers) that his initial push towards Kyiv was either "I'll have a go at that and see if I can get it" or "Kyiv will prove an irresistible bargaining tool if things don't go my way in the east".

I don't think they yet know what caused the bridge incident? It's a possible theory that it was an accident made worse by the adjacent train's explosive load. Ukraine denied responsibility which is very unusual. Certainly the missile strikes on Kyiv after the bridge event is Putin blaming Ukraine and venting his anger - I doubt there is any other reason for them.

I note that Zelensky has applied for NATO membership. It would certainly put the cat among the pigeons if we were to grant this in respect of land currently occupied by Ukraine, effectively drawing a line in the sand, then start moving in Western boots on the ground, and declare the region a no fly zone, apart from authorised flights.

It's the only kind of language Putin understands. A peace deal is pointless as he just can't be trusted. Both sides have already showcased their weaponry, and that of the West has outclassed theirs by many orders of magnitude. So he will know what to expect if he messes with NATO.

In such a scenario, all he will have succeeded in doing is gaining a small amount of territory, and opening up Russia to a huge land border with NATO, if you also include Finland.

Of course, the above probably won't happen, and it is difficult to know exactly how the war will go from now on. But it will by now be blindingly obvious to the Russian people that it's not going well for them, and the poorly trained conscripts really are cannon fodder.  

As far as the bridge, another possibility is action by clandestine anti Putin Russian groups. For Putin to blame Ukraine directly, makes his security look weaker than ever.    

 

       

 

[Peckris 2]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

Of course, the above probably won't happen, and it is difficult to know exactly how the war will go from now on. But it will by now be blindingly obvious to the Russian people that it's not going well for them, and the poorly trained conscripts really are cannon fodder.  

As far as the bridge, another possibility is action by clandestine anti Putin Russian groups. For Putin to blame Ukraine directly, makes his security look weaker than ever.   

Is it? Up to now they've been happy to believe Russian state media UNLESS it comes down to conscription - in which case they suddenly put their money where their feet are (going).

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

Is it? Up to now they've been happy to believe Russian state media UNLESS it comes down to conscription - in which case they suddenly put their money where their feet are (going).

Why would they need conscription if things were going well? What about all the dead troops not even coming back in body bags, but just left to rot on the battlefield?

You can't fool all of the people all of the time. There's a point when the propaganda machine begins to look too wooden, too predictable and ultimately absurd.  

[DaveG38]

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

I note that Zelensky has applied for NATO membership. It would certainly put the cat among the pigeons if we were to grant this in respect of land currently occupied by Ukraine, effectively drawing a line in the sand, then start moving in Western boots on the ground, and declare the region a no fly zone, apart from authorised flights.

It's the only kind of language Putin understands. A peace deal is pointless as he just can't be trusted. Both sides have already showcased their weaponry, and that of the West has outclassed theirs by many orders of magnitude. So he will know what to expect if he messes with NATO.

In such a scenario, all he will have succeeded in doing is gaining a small amount of territory, and opening up Russia to a huge land border with NATO, if you also include Finland.

Of course, the above probably won't happen, and it is difficult to know exactly how the war will go from now on. But it will by now be blindingly obvious to the Russian people that it's not going well for them, and the poorly trained conscripts really are cannon fodder.  

As far as the bridge, another possibility is action by clandestine anti Putin Russian groups. For Putin to blame Ukraine directly, makes his security look weaker than ever.    

 

       

 

I have seen it reported that the truck (if that was the source of the explosion) was heading into Crimea from Russia, in which case it would have had to overcome security checks along the route. Given this, it seems doubtful to me that Ukraine would be able to achieve this attack, at least not without some collaboration from Russian dissidents.