Finally.
-
Ukraine shut down 266 drones and 45 missiles.
That leaves 24 missile and 32 drone hits.
Even if they target infrastructure, 12 seems to be a very low number of casualities.
I would say that either Russia can't aim or Ukraine is understating their defence capabilities.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]There are air raid sirens. Hitting an empty building makes two dozen homeless, but kills nobody. Hitting in a schoolyard might main and cripple dozens, but kill nobody.
And of course, Ukraine is a country at war. They have an interest in understating casualties.
But in the end, terror bombing doesn't work. It didn't work for the Nazis, it didn't work against the Nazis. It didn't work in Vietnam, or Korea, or anywhere anyone has ever tried it. And it's not working now.
-
Finally. But what's been going on in Russia isn't making sense either.
Consider: Some estimates show Russia used 69 missiles and 298 drones between May 23-25.
Googling, "How much does a Russian drone cost?" gives: The cost of Russian drones varies significantly depending on the type and capabilities. Some cheaper drones like the "Ghoul" quadcopter cost as little as $500, while others, like the Shahed-136, are estimated to range from $20,000 to $80,000. More advanced drones, such as the Merlin-VR, can cost over $300,000
So let's say they used a mid-range drone, call it $30,000. 298 of them is $8,940,000.
Google again, "How much does a Russian missile used against Ukraine cost?". Lots of variation, but call it $500,000 for each of the 69 used, for a total of $34,500,000.
So, for this two-day attack, they spent about $43-44 million dollars. And Google again, "How many people were killed in Ukraine May 23-25" says, "at least 12".
Twelve people killed for $44 million. How stupid can you get? Do the Russians realize they could have simply bought the land they want in the Ukraine, if they'd done so through a dummy corporation or something like that?
I realize it's the whole, "terror" thing, but frankly Ukraine ain't terrified.
And now they're going to be really well armed, and off the chain.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I'm quite sure that not all losses/hits are reported to prevent easy damage assessment. With all my contempt for Russia, I cannot imagine that they didn't hit any actually useful target. The mass of munitions is generally used to overwhelm defences.
And we can't forget the information/propaganda part of this war excellently played by both countries here, even though in different ways. It makes sense for Ukraine to play up the murder of civilians and not mention military losses.
Of course, I may be completely wrong here and the orcs are just trying to intimidate Ukraine to surrender with that. But that has rarely worked and definitely won't work on Ukraine.
-
Finally. But what's been going on in Russia isn't making sense either.
Consider: Some estimates show Russia used 69 missiles and 298 drones between May 23-25.
Googling, "How much does a Russian drone cost?" gives: The cost of Russian drones varies significantly depending on the type and capabilities. Some cheaper drones like the "Ghoul" quadcopter cost as little as $500, while others, like the Shahed-136, are estimated to range from $20,000 to $80,000. More advanced drones, such as the Merlin-VR, can cost over $300,000
So let's say they used a mid-range drone, call it $30,000. 298 of them is $8,940,000.
Google again, "How much does a Russian missile used against Ukraine cost?". Lots of variation, but call it $500,000 for each of the 69 used, for a total of $34,500,000.
So, for this two-day attack, they spent about $43-44 million dollars. And Google again, "How many people were killed in Ukraine May 23-25" says, "at least 12".
Twelve people killed for $44 million. How stupid can you get? Do the Russians realize they could have simply bought the land they want in the Ukraine, if they'd done so through a dummy corporation or something like that?
I realize it's the whole, "terror" thing, but frankly Ukraine ain't terrified.
And now they're going to be really well armed, and off the chain.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Missile strikes like this are for damaging infrastructure as much as killing people. If they did enough economic damage it was worth the strike.
For example, look at that recent strike where Ukraine blew up that huge Russian ammo depot. Even if they killed nobody (that’s what Russia claimed lmao), it took out 264,000 tons of missiles, drones, and artillery shells!
-
Finally. But what's been going on in Russia isn't making sense either.
Consider: Some estimates show Russia used 69 missiles and 298 drones between May 23-25.
Googling, "How much does a Russian drone cost?" gives: The cost of Russian drones varies significantly depending on the type and capabilities. Some cheaper drones like the "Ghoul" quadcopter cost as little as $500, while others, like the Shahed-136, are estimated to range from $20,000 to $80,000. More advanced drones, such as the Merlin-VR, can cost over $300,000
So let's say they used a mid-range drone, call it $30,000. 298 of them is $8,940,000.
Google again, "How much does a Russian missile used against Ukraine cost?". Lots of variation, but call it $500,000 for each of the 69 used, for a total of $34,500,000.
So, for this two-day attack, they spent about $43-44 million dollars. And Google again, "How many people were killed in Ukraine May 23-25" says, "at least 12".
Twelve people killed for $44 million. How stupid can you get? Do the Russians realize they could have simply bought the land they want in the Ukraine, if they'd done so through a dummy corporation or something like that?
I realize it's the whole, "terror" thing, but frankly Ukraine ain't terrified.
And now they're going to be really well armed, and off the chain.
This particular Russian attack seems to have been retaliatory in nature, because right before it Ukraine attacked Russian territory including Moscow with hundreds of drones at the same time.
Reported on here for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBAIalMNCAA
And here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NbxXJJJNZkI figure the logic of escalation here is something like "If Ukraine can already make massive strikes on Moscow with self produced drones there isn't much sense in keeping up the range restrictions on NATO equipment anymore".
-
Finally. But what's been going on in Russia isn't making sense either.
Consider: Some estimates show Russia used 69 missiles and 298 drones between May 23-25.
Googling, "How much does a Russian drone cost?" gives: The cost of Russian drones varies significantly depending on the type and capabilities. Some cheaper drones like the "Ghoul" quadcopter cost as little as $500, while others, like the Shahed-136, are estimated to range from $20,000 to $80,000. More advanced drones, such as the Merlin-VR, can cost over $300,000
So let's say they used a mid-range drone, call it $30,000. 298 of them is $8,940,000.
Google again, "How much does a Russian missile used against Ukraine cost?". Lots of variation, but call it $500,000 for each of the 69 used, for a total of $34,500,000.
So, for this two-day attack, they spent about $43-44 million dollars. And Google again, "How many people were killed in Ukraine May 23-25" says, "at least 12".
Twelve people killed for $44 million. How stupid can you get? Do the Russians realize they could have simply bought the land they want in the Ukraine, if they'd done so through a dummy corporation or something like that?
I realize it's the whole, "terror" thing, but frankly Ukraine ain't terrified.
And now they're going to be really well armed, and off the chain.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Thinking about this in terms of money spent is the wrong mindset. That 44 million dollars went from the hands of one Russian into the hands of another. And it even counts towards their GDP. On the other side, 12 Ukrainians are dead. Think about that. Depopulation, especially of working aged people is what's really going to hurt your economy, not spending money on weapons.
As a sidenote, politicians often want you to believe that you can't have nice things because "there isn't enough money". That is just bullshit.
-
Thinking about this in terms of money spent is the wrong mindset. That 44 million dollars went from the hands of one Russian into the hands of another. And it even counts towards their GDP. On the other side, 12 Ukrainians are dead. Think about that. Depopulation, especially of working aged people is what's really going to hurt your economy, not spending money on weapons.
As a sidenote, politicians often want you to believe that you can't have nice things because "there isn't enough money". That is just bullshit.
Excellent points. While on the outside it does look like the Russians could have bought out all of Eastern Ukraine's homeowners/farmers/citizens for $1 mil apiece, spent less money and still got the territory they want, it isn't that simple.
-
There are air raid sirens. Hitting an empty building makes two dozen homeless, but kills nobody. Hitting in a schoolyard might main and cripple dozens, but kill nobody.
And of course, Ukraine is a country at war. They have an interest in understating casualties.
But in the end, terror bombing doesn't work. It didn't work for the Nazis, it didn't work against the Nazis. It didn't work in Vietnam, or Korea, or anywhere anyone has ever tried it. And it's not working now.
Did it work on Japan?
-
Did it work on Japan?
One could argue that literally nuking two whole cities and burning a dozen more to the ground DID contribute to the surrender of a nation that was basically already defeated in every single way except for civilians with handguns and pointy bits of metal.
One could also argue the incredible scale of the allied bombing campaign on Japan wasn't terror bombing. It wasn't meant to scare the Japanese into surrender, it was meant to destroy them into surrender.
It took the entire industrial power of the allies to make it happen. Over 25000 sorties, millions of liters of napalm, hundreds of millions kilos of bombs (not counting 2 nukes), basically unopposed bombing for years in addition to ground and naval war.
And they still almost committed a coup and against god, rather than surrender.
-
Well if you invest it into your people and infrastructure you can't line you friends pockets
️Couldn't they subcontract out the infrastructure construction to their friends?
-
Couldn't they subcontract out the infrastructure construction to their friends?
But if they had to do honest work, they wouldn't become even more filthy rich
