johns624 wrote:

THS214 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

So you know that those rockets were launched at the shopping mall because Trudeau and Johnson made fun of Putin?

If that question in to me then of course I don't know for sure.

No, it was directed at the gentleman from the Netherlands.

Thank you.

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

So you think Putin established a last-minute strike on a civilian structure because he took offense of a comment instead of, say, the multiple ammunition stockpiles or Russian soldiers in Snake Island getting blown up by Western-supplied weapons systems?

That's a bold statement, to say the least.

It's not if Putin took it personally. If Putin is not reacting he is seen weak in Russia. That is not an alternative to him.

Please explain why Russians fired missiles 200 km from the front to a shopping center where it makes no strategical sense? Those missiles were fired there on purpose. There was a reason for it and it doesn't give anything to conversation if you argue that I'm wrong without saying anything why it happened.

You make the mistake of confusing what is part of a war and and what Russia considers as an attack against their president i.a. against the country. A big difference.

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

Russia have tight controls on foreign news coming for the common Russian citizen. Everything about foreign news they show up in their news is carefully filtered and curated. An offhand joke barely registers.

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

THS214 wrote:

That is Russian modus operandi. Their excuses are well know of not being truthful. Should not read to much into it.

Then their true intension can only be guessed at. No one here can say one way or the other. It will be a long while before the truth can come out, if ever.

File this under another senseless attack, right there bellow the Mariupo theater attack. Do recall what predicated that attack? As if Putin needed a reason?

bt

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

It's not if Putin took it personally. If Putin is not reacting he is seen weak in Russia. That is not an alternative to him.

Please explain why Russians fired missiles 200 km from the front to a shopping center where it makes no strategical sense? Those missiles were fired there on purpose. There was a reason for it and it doesn't give anything to conversation if you argue that I'm wrong without saying anything why it happened.

You make the mistake of confusing what is part of a war and and what Russia considers as an attack against their president i.a. against the country. A big difference.

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

Russia have tight controls on foreign news coming for the common Russian citizen. Everything about foreign news they show up in their news is carefully filtered and curated. An offhand joke barely registers.

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

That works for your Putin hurt ego assumption too.

Ockham's razor here says someone, somewhere massively f'ed up and now Russia is running media damage control (they were hitting a weapons depot nearby and the fire spread).

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

Russia have tight controls on foreign news coming for the common Russian citizen. Everything about foreign news they show up in their news is carefully filtered and curated. An offhand joke barely registers.

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

That works for your Putin hurt ego assumption too.

Ockham's razor here says someone, somewhere massively f'ed up and now Russia is running media damage control (they were hitting a weapons depot nearby and the fire spread).

Your Ockham's razor doesn't work here as you base it the way people in the West think when Ockham's razor here should be seen from Russian side. And Ockham's razor requires that you know how Russians think.

THS214 wrote:

Ockham's razor requires that you know how Russians think.

After months of conflict in the Ukraine, as well as conflicts in amongst others Syria and Chechnya, the Russian thought process has become quite clear.

They always go for civilian targets, the more casualties the merrier. The shopping mall attack is not an outlier.

You don’t need to have lived for years in Russia to see this.

The Netherlands and Germany will each send an additional 3 Pzh.2000.
These are in addition to the 12 delivered earlier.

https://nos.nl/liveblog/2434356-nederla ... oor-russen

Turkey has dropped their objections to Sweden and Finland joining NATO.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61960122

petertenthije wrote:

They always go for civilian targets, the more casualties the merrier. The shopping mall attack is not an outlier.

One thing that I am relieved that the Russian have not done as much as opposed in Syria, they have not really made a concerted effort to hit hospitals. Mariupol and may be Kharkiv. Where there other outliers?

bt

petertenthije wrote:

THS214 wrote:

Ockham's razor requires that you know how Russians think.

After months of conflict in the Ukraine, as well as conflicts in amongst others Syria and Chechnya, the Russian thought process has become quite clear.

They always go for civilian targets, the more casualties the merrier. The shopping mall attack is not an outlier.

You don’t need to have lived for years in Russia to see this.

That's not what we talk here. We talk about the reason Russia hit that shopping center. We know Russia hit a civilian target but why?

bikerthai wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

They always go for civilian targets, the more casualties the merrier. The shopping mall attack is not an outlier.

One thing that I am relieved that the Russian have not done as much as opposed in Syria, they have not really made a concerted effort to hit hospitals. Mariupol and may be Kharkiv. Where there other outliers?

bt

Russia has been attacking healthcare facilities since day 1 and continues to do so along with all the other atrocities against innocent civilians. All well documented.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60866669

bikerthai wrote:

One thing that I am relieved that the Russian have not done as much as opposed in Syria, they have not really made a concerted effort to hit hospitals. Mariupol and may be Kharkiv. Where there other outliers?

bt

400 hospitals, clinics, maternity wards and other medical facilities… on a source from the beginning of May. So that list will be well out of date.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8814156/ukra ... zelenskyy/

petertenthije wrote:

400 hospitals, clinics, maternity wards and other medical facilities… on a source from the beginning of May. So that list will be well out of date.

Then it is unfortunate that these attacks do not get the same press coverage.

At least there is an avenue for patients to go west if the Ukrainian hospitals are swamped.

As for the May data, it was mid May when Ukraine pushed Russian forces from Kharkiv, so the opportunity to hit health care facilities with artilery are now only in the Donbas area.


bt

petertenthije wrote:

Turkey has dropped their objections to Sweden and Finland joining NATO.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61960122

Congrats to Finland and Nato.

Will be interesting to find out what that cost....

bikerthai wrote:

THS214 wrote:

That is Russian modus operandi. Their excuses are well know of not being truthful. Should not read to much into it.

Then their true intension can only be guessed at. No one here can say one way or the other. It will be a long while before the truth can come out, if ever. File this under another senseless attack, right there bellow the Mariupo theater attack. Do recall what predicated that attack? As if Putin needed a reason? bt

I must disagree; I think it was clearly a message to Ukraine saying, "If you want to keep fighting us, this is what you can expect". Putin clearly has no scruples with regards to civilian casualties; they - like his own conscripts - are merely cannon fodder in his personal ambition to "make Russia great again".

If he can't win on the battlefield - and his wins have been far more limited than he planned - then he aims to demoralize and divide the enemy. He has created a monster he cannot afford to escape - and civilians are merely pawns in his demented chess game.

petertenthije wrote:

After months of conflict in the Ukraine, as well as conflicts in amongst others Syria and Chechnya, the Russian thought process has become quite clear.
They always go for civilian targets, the more casualties the merrier. The shopping mall attack is not an outlier. You don’t need to have lived for years in Russia to see this.

par13del wrote:

Will be interesting to find out what that cost....

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/28/turkey-lifts-objections-to-finland-and-swedens-nato-bid

It seems it’s being paid by the Kurds, so nothing really new….

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

That works for your Putin hurt ego assumption too.

Ockham's razor here says someone, somewhere massively f'ed up and now Russia is running media damage control (they were hitting a weapons depot nearby and the fire spread).

Your Ockham's razor doesn't work here as you base it the way people in the West think when Ockham's razor here should be seen from Russian side. And Ockham's razor requires that you know how Russians think.

There's no tangible military benefit for Russia of hitting a civilian target.

If Russia intended to hit a shopping center they would not had done a half assed attempt at covering their tracks by saying they hit a mythical nearby command center and then the fire spread to the stores.

Russians aren't an alien species, they're a bit on the medieval side on how they respond to threats and perceived threats and the whole maskirovka stuff but above all they're using outdated weapons and insufficient intelligence. I've been visiting Russia and dealing with Russian people for about 20 years now.

I'm open to think it as a terror strike to try to bring Ukr morale down, but second only to plain old incompetence.

Definitely not a finely crafted retaliation because of some insult at the dear leader.

alfa164 wrote:

I must disagree; I think it was clearly a message to Ukraine saying, "If you want to keep fighting us, this is what you can expect".

The argument was whether the shopping mall attack was in response to: the G7 summit in general, the "joking comment" by Johnson during a luncheon at the summit, the first attack by HIMARs, or a senseless terror attack.

Which in is the truth? Right now we can only espress our opinions.

JJJ wrote:

I'm open to think it as a terror strike to try to bring Ukr morale down, but second only to plain old incompetence.

If Putin is a student of history, he would know that such form of terrorism only works when the victim can not shoot back.

But then, it is conceivable that it could be all the reasons we discussed combined

bt

marcelh wrote:

par13del wrote:

Will be interesting to find out what that cost....

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/28/turkey-lifts-objections-to-finland-and-swedens-nato-bid

It seems it’s being paid by the Kurds, so nothing really new….

Highly doubt that, the Turkey / Kurd issue is domestic and has been ongoing for centuries, Finland / Sweden allowing activists on their soil is minuscule compared to the greater conflict. The most recent armed conflict is not where it started, its just where a lot of folks in the west started paying attention.
Naw I suspect much more is involved and it will not be Finland or Sweden who will be paying the price, I suspect it will be the Americans, does Turkey still want to join the EU?
https://theconversation.com/why-the-kur ... ble-125101
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish%E ... h_conflict

Erdogan is playing internal politics, drumming up the mortal enemies PKK, whether real or perceived. It's also a bone of contention with France where PKK has been present for decades.

Erdogan is also smarter than we want to give him credit for, let's consider the F-35 and Russian SAM's, will he be back on the F-35 program in a year or two, will he be back on the improved Patriots and its replacements, after all, Turkey is still a NATO member, right?
One outcome of the Cuban missile crisis was the removal of missiles from Turkey, was that front and center in the world's eye, or only observed by those in the know at the time? In our politically correct environment, I suspect something similar, just have to keep our ears to the ground to find out.

par13del wrote:

Erdogan is also smarter than we want to give him credit for, let's consider the F-35 and Russian SAM's, will he be back on the F-35 program in a year or two

The quickest way to do that is to send all their S-400 to Ukraine. Win -Win.

bt

Please remember to provide a link to your source when stating facts or make it clear when you are stating your opinion. Thanks.

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

That works for your Putin hurt ego assumption too.

Ockham's razor here says someone, somewhere massively f'ed up and now Russia is running media damage control (they were hitting a weapons depot nearby and the fire spread).

Your Ockham's razor doesn't work here as you base it the way people in the West think when Ockham's razor here should be seen from Russian side. And Ockham's razor requires that you know how Russians think.

There's no tangible military benefit for Russia of hitting a civilian target.

If Russia intended to hit a shopping center they would not had done a half assed attempt at covering their tracks by saying they hit a mythical nearby command center and then the fire spread to the stores.

Russians aren't an alien species, they're a bit on the medieval side on how they respond to threats and perceived threats and the whole maskirovka stuff but above all they're using outdated weapons and insufficient intelligence. I've been visiting Russia and dealing with Russian people for about 20 years now.

I'm open to think it as a terror strike to try to bring Ukr morale down, but second only to plain old incompetence.

Definitely not a finely crafted retaliation because of some insult at the dear leader.

Now your post make sense. So we agree to disagree. Remember that what Russia says is not meant to the west but Russian people and there that kind of nonsense works.

Unfortunately that Nato, Finland, Sweden and Türkiye is not moved forward as many think. There is a memorandum, nothing more. We shall still wait what will happen. https://www.presidentti.fi/en/press-rel ... june-2022/ Finland and Sweden will not send those 33 people that Türkiye wants (interview of the Finnish Foreign minister).

johns624 wrote:

marcelh wrote:

johns624 wrote:

So you know that those rockets were launched at the shopping mall because Trudeau and Johnson made fun of Putin?

Did I say that? No. Just another attempt by you to frame my post.

Yes, you just said it. If not, what "people who got killed/injured and their families" would you be talking about.

I did earlier today and “miraculously” my post disappeared….

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

It's not if Putin took it personally. If Putin is not reacting he is seen weak in Russia. That is not an alternative to him.

Please explain why Russians fired missiles 200 km from the front to a shopping center where it makes no strategical sense? Those missiles were fired there on purpose. There was a reason for it and it doesn't give anything to conversation if you argue that I'm wrong without saying anything why it happened.

You make the mistake of confusing what is part of a war and and what Russia considers as an attack against their president i.a. against the country. A big difference.

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

Russia have tight controls on foreign news coming for the common Russian citizen. Everything about foreign news they show up in their news is carefully filtered and curated. An offhand joke barely registers.

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

They did not.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/06 ... -evidence/



Only one missile hit the mall, the other hit some half a kilometer North of the mall.

The factory Russian MoD claims they were targeting was bracketed by both impacts, both missing (one within the compound, but missed the buildings).

Footage of the missile;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM2YTH8Puts

Ukrainian gunners training in the UK;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOJ5jbXQIa8
(I think those 105mm guns were from New Zealand, which reminds that so far, some 50 nations have given various levels of support to Ukraine, this narrative about how only NATO, EU and a few others give a crap is false).

We have heard a lot about the M777's and various SP systems, what about the gun the M777 replaced? Still relatively modern and according to as seen here, one source, have been shipped to Ukraine in numbers, though I've seen no footage, note the former operators notably the US, still holds some in store;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M198_howi ... _operators

Russian forces withdraw from Ukraine's Snake Island

The Russians had enough being bombed. Now what's next? Is it safe enough for the Ukrainian to re-occupy the island? It's maybe more important to prevent the Russians to retake the island than for the Ukrainians to deploy weapons.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220630-live-russians-battle-to-encircle-ukraine-s-last-eastern-stronghold

tomcat wrote:

Russian forces withdraw from Ukraine's Snake Island

The Russians had enough being bombed. Now what's next? Is it safe enough for the Ukrainian to re-occupy the island? It's maybe more important to prevent the Russians to retake the island than for the Ukrainians to deploy weapons.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220630-live-russians-battle-to-encircle-ukraine-s-last-eastern-stronghold

You beat me! I had seen this this;
https://www.youtube.com/c/AdamSomething/community

So went looking for more confirmation;

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ategic-win

I love the excuse the Russians reportedly gave!

Official Ukrainian footage, clearly with a celebratory aspect;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Es8mjqm-dE

Wondering if the geopolitical stance of being seen as mass famine facilitators (something Ukraine knows all too well with Russia), is proving a serious negative for Russia with those not wholly on Ukraine's side?

GDB wrote:

tomcat wrote:

Russian forces withdraw from Ukraine's Snake Island

The Russians had enough being bombed. Now what's next? Is it safe enough for the Ukrainian to re-occupy the island? It's maybe more important to prevent the Russians to retake the island than for the Ukrainians to deploy weapons.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220630-live-russians-battle-to-encircle-ukraine-s-last-eastern-stronghold

You beat me! I had seen this this;
https://www.youtube.com/c/AdamSomething/community

So went looking for more confirmation;

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ategic-win

I love the excuse the Russians reportedly gave!

Official Ukrainian footage, clearly with a celebratory aspect;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Es8mjqm-dE

Wondering if the geopolitical stance of being seen as mass famine facilitators (something Ukraine knows all too well with Russia), is proving a serious negative for Russia with those not wholly on Ukraine's side?

Interesting that they used - among others - their indigenous SP artillery to bomb the island.

I would think that it's the repeated bombing of the island by the Ukrainians that convinced the Russians to abandon the island rather than any geopolitical stance. Especially considering that the island was only one of their mean to organise this mass famine. They keep stealing grains from Ukraine, they keep bombing silos, their war is preventing many Ukrainian farmers to work freely in their fields and the blockade of the Ukrainian seaports will not be terminated just by the loss of control of Snake Island. Also at this stage it has become clear that the Russians only understand the military language.

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

Russia have tight controls on foreign news coming for the common Russian citizen. Everything about foreign news they show up in their news is carefully filtered and curated. An offhand joke barely registers.

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

They did not.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/06 ... -evidence/



Only one missile hit the mall, the other hit some half a kilometer North of the mall.

The factory Russian MoD claims they were targeting was bracketed by both impacts, both missing (one within the compound, but missed the buildings).

So the mall was not targeted but a factory. I stand corrected. If that factory was a legitimate military target then Ukrainians put it's citizens endanger by having such a thing in the middle of a city. Those missiles hit couple hundred meters from their target. So the mall was a collateral damage. At least this kind of miss was so called before.

tomcat wrote:

The Russians had enough being bombed. Now what's next? Is it safe enough for the Ukrainian to re-occupy the island?

Yesterday, I was wondering why there was a P-8A doing a night shift over Romaina (have not seen any NATO sigint planes do that before in that area). Over the last several days there were increases NATO air activities in that area including at one point three tankers aloft. And at another point a KC-46.

Now I know.

I would not be surprised if Ukraine forces are not already on the Island and the P-8A night shift was supporting the night operation. Just speculation here.

Will have to wait for the news to fill in the details.

bt

Edit: Forgot to mention the 3 Black Hawks in the area yesterday as well. And one if them is up this morning

THS214 wrote:

If that factory was a legitimate military target then Ukrainians put it's citizens endanger by having such a thing in the middle of a city.

It may have been a legitimate military target for the Russian if they were using bad intelligence.

Svitlana Rybalko, from the regional State Emergency Service, denied there were weapons stored at the facility."It's a place for making road equipment, machines for road construction," she told the BBC. "There's also a greenhouse nearby where workers grow cucumbers."

https://www.bbc.com/news/61967480.amp

bt

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

Missed couple hundred kilometers. I doubt they have any real intelligence on that area and no strategical reason to attack there. Two missiles malfunctioned at the same time and same way. Then they hit exactly the same place. No, that is not easy, it's wrong assumption.

They did not.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/06 ... -evidence/



Only one missile hit the mall, the other hit some half a kilometer North of the mall.

The factory Russian MoD claims they were targeting was bracketed by both impacts, both missing (one within the compound, but missed the buildings).

So the mall was not targeted but a factory. I stand corrected. If that factory was a legitimate military target then Ukrainians put it's citizens endanger by having such a thing in the middle of a city. Those missiles hit couple hundred meters from their target. So the mall was a collateral damage. At least this kind of miss was so called before.

Read the article. Nothing military significant was going on in that factory

It was poor intelligence, amplified by old hardware and likely bad tactical decisions (I mean if the RuAF is so awesome why should they use a 60s vintage guided missile at the edge of their range when they could have shot from much closer range).

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

They did not.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/06 ... -evidence/



Only one missile hit the mall, the other hit some half a kilometer North of the mall.

The factory Russian MoD claims they were targeting was bracketed by both impacts, both missing (one within the compound, but missed the buildings).

So the mall was not targeted but a factory. I stand corrected. If that factory was a legitimate military target then Ukrainians put it's citizens endanger by having such a thing in the middle of a city. Those missiles hit couple hundred meters from their target. So the mall was a collateral damage. At least this kind of miss was so called before.

Read the article. Nothing military significant was going on in that factory

It was poor intelligence, amplified by old hardware and likely bad tactical decisions (I mean if the RuAF is so awesome why should they use a 60s vintage guided missile at the edge of their range when they could have shot from much closer range).

They are wasting the few left supersonic upgraded Kh 22, highly precise enough to destroy a target with a 1 mgt H bomb....so not precise....with a conventional warhead, because this is all what they have left.

And with this they are even eliminating/de-arming the nuclear potential by the Tu22 bombers, because the Kh-22 is the only nuclear cruise missile, they can carry.
So they are de-arming the Tu 22 to a conventional bomber.
And why are they doing it; as already several times stated here, they have already spent all modern cruise missile and Iskander M around mid of Apr-2022 (with exception of submarine based ones, but they have only one or two subs in black see (who are regular loaded in Sevastopol, "unload" the cruise missile and drive back for reloading).
They just have not enough subs in the black see and the capacity is low.
And in the meanwhile even the anti ship rockets with dual use for land attack are gone.
(Kh 22 is a carrier group killer with regular a nuke warhead).

And sorry to say, as already seen AGAIN AND AGAIN in every shit war/engagement in last decades: To be 100 % sure to get hit by a Russian bomb, be in a hospital, school, mall full of civilians, bunkers, clearly marked as civilian e.g.

This is called terror and this is Russian standard. We have seen it AGAIN AND AGAIN in Syria and all of the other conflicts and we see the same here again and again in Ukraine.

Dang. It's the long range artilery after all.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/15 ... 8qlrg&s=19

Ukraine indigenous 155 artilery hitting Snake Island.

Talk about an artileryman dream. You can shoot at something and they can't shoot back.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

Dang. It's the long range artilery after all.

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/15 ... 8qlrg&s=19

Ukraine indigenous 155 artilery hitting Snake Island.

Talk about an artileryman dream. You can shoot at something and they can't shoot back.

bt

I thought it was a CAESAR at first, this Ukrainian 155mm system was still being being tested at the start of the war and almost destroyed to prevent it falling into Russian hands, when the invaders were stalled and pushed back it apparently played its part.
So very appropriate to use it against such a symbolic target.

Being a tech junkie, I was wondering if they were using rocket assisted rounds. But more informed folks in the twitersphere suggests they used "base bleed" rounds.

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/154 ... LAqPA&s=19

The science behind it is pretty straight forward. Similar to how flow diverters on top of SUVs work in terms of directing air down behind the car as opposed to deflectors on race cars that pushes air up an presses down on the rear wheel.

bt

BBC Diplomatic Editor, Military Historian and former British Army Cold War Tank Commander, Mark Urban, looks at one unit of the Russian army, one of their top tier regiments, the war, back in their community and even the route of one BMD vehicle;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jrS1xpbNFA

I know it comes in part from Ukrainian authorities and I don't blame them for it but I don't get the outrage about the mall. Russia has flattened entire cities, has committed clear war crimes of all kinds...

Aesma wrote:

I know it comes in part from Ukrainian authorities and I don't blame them for it but I don't get the outrage about the mall. Russia has flattened entire cities, has committed clear war crimes of all kinds...

It's just to keep in the public's mind that the Russians are barbaric. With the short attention span and memory of most people, they have to be constantly reminded.

So if Russia wants to reduce western support for the Ukraine war, they should stop hitting civilian targets (intentional or not).

bt

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

They did not.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/06 ... -evidence/



Only one missile hit the mall, the other hit some half a kilometer North of the mall.

The factory Russian MoD claims they were targeting was bracketed by both impacts, both missing (one within the compound, but missed the buildings).

So the mall was not targeted but a factory. I stand corrected. If that factory was a legitimate military target then Ukrainians put it's citizens endanger by having such a thing in the middle of a city. Those missiles hit couple hundred meters from their target. So the mall was a collateral damage. At least this kind of miss was so called before.

Read the article. Nothing military significant was going on in that factory

It was poor intelligence, amplified by old hardware and likely bad tactical decisions (I mean if the RuAF is so awesome why should they use a 60s vintage guided missile at the edge of their range when they could have shot from much closer range).

We both were wrong. I admitted it you don't. Do you really believe what Ukrainians would say that the target in the middle of a city was a military target? First thing that is lost in a war is truth. Maybe that target was military site or not. I don't take granted what Russians and Ukrainian say about it. Objectively the only answer is that we don't know.

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

So the mall was not targeted but a factory. I stand corrected. If that factory was a legitimate military target then Ukrainians put it's citizens endanger by having such a thing in the middle of a city. Those missiles hit couple hundred meters from their target. So the mall was a collateral damage. At least this kind of miss was so called before.

Read the article. Nothing military significant was going on in that factory

It was poor intelligence, amplified by old hardware and likely bad tactical decisions (I mean if the RuAF is so awesome why should they use a 60s vintage guided missile at the edge of their range when they could have shot from much closer range).

We both were wrong. I admitted it you don't. Do you really believe what Ukrainians would say that the target in the middle of a city was a military target? First thing that is lost in a war is truth. Maybe that target was military site or not. I don't take granted what Russians and Ukrainian say about it. Objectively the only answer is that we don't know.

I said:

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

We know they missed, as in not hitting their intended target and all evidence points at the industrial site not having military value (bad intelligence).

My point stands.

johns624 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

I know it comes in part from Ukrainian authorities and I don't blame them for it but I don't get the outrage about the mall. Russia has flattened entire cities, has committed clear war crimes of all kinds...

It's just to keep in the public's mind that the Russians are barbaric. With the short attention span and memory of most people, they have to be constantly reminded.

And this attack provided graphic images (extensive fire, image of the incoming missile,...) that are ideal to convey the message in the media about how barbaric the Russians are.

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

Read the article. Nothing military significant was going on in that factory

It was poor intelligence, amplified by old hardware and likely bad tactical decisions (I mean if the RuAF is so awesome why should they use a 60s vintage guided missile at the edge of their range when they could have shot from much closer range).

We both were wrong. I admitted it you don't. Do you really believe what Ukrainians would say that the target in the middle of a city was a military target? First thing that is lost in a war is truth. Maybe that target was military site or not. I don't take granted what Russians and Ukrainian say about it. Objectively the only answer is that we don't know.

I said:

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

We know they missed, as in not hitting their intended target and all evidence points at the industrial site not having military value (bad intelligence).

My point stands.

"Or" means that one of those happened. So what of those was it? None of those happened! I said I was wrong. You didn't. Yet we both were wrong. They didn't miss. Couple hundred meters is not a miss. There is no evidence that it was not a military target. Ukrainians say so, Russians not. First thing that is lost in a war is truth. So we must wait. "all evidence points at the industrial site not having military value" All evidence... Only evidence to support your claim comes from Ukraine. Really reliable source. Not from Russia and not from objective source.

THS214 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

THS214 wrote:

We both were wrong. I admitted it you don't. Do you really believe what Ukrainians would say that the target in the middle of a city was a military target? First thing that is lost in a war is truth. Maybe that target was military site or not. I don't take granted what Russians and Ukrainian say about it. Objectively the only answer is that we don't know.

I said:

Easy: they missed, malfunctioned or relied on bad intelligence.

We know they missed, as in not hitting their intended target and all evidence points at the industrial site not having military value (bad intelligence).

My point stands.

"Or" means that one of those happened. So what of those was it? None of those happened! I said I was wrong. You didn't. Yet we both were wrong. They didn't miss. Couple hundred meters is not a miss. There is no evidence that it was not a military target. Ukrainians say so, Russians not. First thing that is lost in a war is truth. So we must wait. "all evidence points at the industrial site not having military value" All evidence... Only evidence to support your claim comes from Ukraine. Really reliable source. Not from Russia and not from objective source.

That would be a XOR, mate.

And hitting a mall instead of a 20+ hectare industrial site is quite the miss. But that's probably as accurate as the RuAF can hope for these days.

Back to the military target definition. The onus is on the ones sending a missile to a plant making asphalt mixers and salt/sand spreaders.

tomcat wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

I know it comes in part from Ukrainian authorities and I don't blame them for it but I don't get the outrage about the mall. Russia has flattened entire cities, has committed clear war crimes of all kinds...

It's just to keep in the public's mind that the Russians are barbaric. With the short attention span and memory of most people, they have to be constantly reminded.

And this attack provided graphic images (extensive fire, image of the incoming missile,...) that are ideal to convey the message in the media about how barbaric the Russians are.

The sad thing is the Russians don't care about their image because that's the way that they've always done things.