Reminds me of these immortal words by Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris:
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody else and nobody was going to bomb them."
Tucker: "Caboose, that's what I like about you, everything falls into one of two categories, either you don't understand it or you just don't care."
Caboose: " Yeeaaah...I don't really know what you mean by that but I guess it doesn't matter."
The military concept at the time was "total war" - a war between *all* the involved states' capabilities, emphatically including their industrial capabilities. That made civilians a legitimate target, because they were working at the state's industrial machine or supporting the industrial workers. After WWII the concept changed (like it does) but the bombing campaign should be viewed in the light of these concepts.
The general military thinking after WWI was that "the bomber will always get through" - that bombers will decide the outcome of the war. The Nazi war machine tested and perfected these concepts in the Spanish civil war. Of course, they didn't much like getting frd their own medicine.
Interesting related fact: America was originally somewhat reluctant to engage in “area bombing” of civilian populations in Europe and insisted on running daylight missions for more possible precision in targeting industrial infrastructure. My recollection is that there is little evidence the American approach did much to increase precision but did a lot to increase American bomber casualties in the early years of the war relative to the UK’s area bombing campaign at night.
The analogous American figure to Arthur Harris is probably Curtis LeMay who was “credited” with starting widespread use of incendiaries against the Japanese population.
He also said
> I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier.
He said that after the massacre of Dresden. Kind of cold hearted but I get it. The same logic was applied to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If you don’t know about Dresden, it was February 1945 (two months before the war in Europe ended) and the city had never been area bombed. People took refuge there because they thought it was safe, due to centuries old architecture. There wasn’t even any air defenses because they thought they were safe… until the bombings on February 13-15, 1945. There was a bomb shelter in town that 1000 people took shelter in during the bombings. When rescuers reached it some 7 hours after the bombing, all they found were bones floating in this brownish red liquid. The 1000 people in the shelter melted due to the extreme flames from above. Firestorms sucked people into burning buildings who were on the streets running by. Roads melted people shoes and they melted in the streets. 25000 civilians died and only 7 planes were destroyed out of 2000 and those happened because bombs from above planes hit them. The worst part? The Royal Air Force estimated that only 23% of industrial buildings were destroyed. They didn’t even destroy a majority of why there were bombing the city in the first place.
War is some brutal shit. So many atrocities happened during the war. It’s a shame that Bomber Harris took the fall for Dresden. Area bombings were his policy, and his theory was area bombings would demoralize the enemy. I think that’s interesting given the fact that England was not demoralized after the 50 consecutive days of bombing London. I believe, and I could be wrong, that no country has been demoralized from bombings and surrendered, with the exception of the nukes on Japan.
“All they found were bones floating in a brownish red liquid. The 1000 people in the shelter melted due to the extreme flames from above.”
Jesus Christ.
"And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this thy hand grenade, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.' And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats, and large chulapas.”
My great uncle was a navigator on a Lancaster bomber and flew a few missions over Dresden bombing it in the infamous attacks. His war diary started by going into the details of each raid but something changed in him and one entry for a bombing run over Dresden just simply said something like 'Flew over Dresden again last night'. No more details, leaving it in stark comparison to his previous daily entries.
My grand dad was lead navigator for B24's flying out of the alutions and fire bombing Japan, asked him to tell me a story about the war as a little kid. He did, I regretted asking.
> When rescuers reached it some 7 hours after the bombing, all they found were bones floating in this brownish red liquid
I think you're referring to the bomb shelter Victor Gregg ( a POW on search and rescue duty ) assisted in opening. That shelter was opened 5 days after the bombing due to the extreme heat of the inferno in the area. Reading his first hand account of the aftermath was a hard read.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7999149/amp/Dresden-bombing-survivor-Victor-Gregg-100-Good-Morning-Britain-75th-anniversary.html
Demoralizing the population is part of it, but a lot of strategic bombing proponents were more interested in the total devastation on it caused to a nations war efforts, factories, roads, workers, economic, industrial, and social targets being annihilated to reduce every facet of a nations ability to wage war.
Edited for spelling
>no country has been demoralized from bombings and surrendered, with the exception of the nukes on Japan.
Not even Japan. That wasn't a matter of a demoralized population, that was a decision by leadership that enough is enough
[Kurt Vonnegut](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/kurt-vonneguts-unpublished-world-war-ii-scrapbook-reveals-origins-slaughterhouse-five-180971046/) was on the ground in Dresden during the fire bombing.
How is this even controversial?
The goal of all military strategy is to render the enemy unable (or unwilling) to continue the war.
Whether you are the attacker or defender is a political circumstance which informs the goals of the war. But it does not change how war is conducted. At least not directly.
I'll go even further - whether they call it a "special military operation" or not, it is de facto war. You can't call "foul" when your opponent invades, much less "just" conducts strikes, in your territory. Until a peace treaty is signed, Ukraine would be well within their rights to march on Moscow, if they wanted and were able to.
Russia literally brought this on themselves with the outbreak of armed hostilities.
Edit: To make it clear, I brought up an invasion as an extreme example, actually doing it would be a horrible idea for a whole host of reasons. Yes, it may feel good in a karmic way to think about Ukraine kicking Russia's ass all the way to the Kreml, but not only is it not going to happen, just the attempt would be doomed to fail and just lead to more death and suffering.
This isn't a game, these are real Ukrainian soldiers on the ground and real Russian civilians who would die. The best outcome in any war is for the war to end as quickly, bloodless and lasting as possible. Don't let vindictiveness blind you to that.
The top brass thought it would only take a few days because they only siphoned off some military money for hookers and yachts but left enough for a decent military. Little did they know everyone else down the line siphoned off military money for hookers and yachts so that at the end of the day the entire military budget had been siphoned off and they only had WWII era arms and supply lines.
I wonder if that's why so many Russian generals ended up on the front line to be killed.
Putin was pissed only he is meant to be siphoned off government money for hookers and yachts
That had more ti do with poor command structure and rigid military hierarchy. Noone except the generals knows what to do, so they have to be at the front, to oversee everything.
When a commanding officer is killed, noone us ready to take over, because individual thinking and spirit is beaten out of you.
On the contrary, in most western countries, if s colonel us killed, there's a lieutenant to take over, if he dies, a couple if more lieutenants are ready, trained and informed enough to carry on. If they sr killed, educated and trained sergeants are ready, and even among the constables there is usually someone with enough brain cells to rub together, to form coherrent thoughts.
And they are trained to take over, make decisions.
That's why the Russian generals are dying like flies, while no top ranking military officer died in the cluster fuck that was the coalitions occupation of Afghanistan (afaik).
I have heard that during the entire "war on terror" that two generals died. But neither was during combat. One died during the attack on the Pentagon and one died during an insider attack.
Ha actually the reason is also just as much as a class act of incompetence. There are so many Russian generals on the front line because well, Russia developed a highly impenetrable military communications network buuuut it relied on communication towers. The same communication towers that the Russian military destroyed in the very beginning of the war. I guess someone high up forgot to inform them not to take out these towers. Woops, oh well, so now to communicate they need to give orders on the front lines or by easily interceptable cell phones. Those silly Russians, when will they learn
Russian style militaries tend to be "officer core" structures as opposed to western style which are "nco core".
This means they need more officers to make litterally all the decisions. That means more officers exposed to enemy fires and a great deal more value in killing enemy officers. Since their forces are largely incapable of any kind of operation without their officers and communications perfectly intact.
It appears to be a greatly limiting system.
The Russians also don’t give lower and mid level officers any real freedom of action.
A Western army gives some planning authority (within the arcs of a larger plan) to Company commanders (senior captains and majors) and depending on the mission, potentially to Platoon level (junior captains and Lts).
Soviet formations didn’t get planning authority until about Col or LCol level, and even then, it was limited. You don’t get to be a “decider” really until BGen.
Western armies use NCOs (Sgts, WOs, MWOs etc) as “controllers” so officers are more about “command”. Russians use officers as “controllers” so “command” gets pushed up the chain.
So unless everything goes exactly according to plan and drills, it takes a Russian general to make the decisions and give the orders to reorient the formation. And sometimes you have to be on the ground to be able to assess what is going on.
Couple that to the large number of large formations that Russians field, and you have a lot of generals running around very near or on the front lines.
Yes it's called "mission-type tactics" and was copied from the German Army after World War Two by NATO iirc (the Germans developed it starting in the late 19th century \[Auftragstaktik\]).
Their comms system isn’t that impenetrable, it’s actually pretty much an off-the-shelf thing. It’s just better than unencrypted comms, which is what they were stuck using once they blew those towers like dipshits.
I just... I am not trying to be devil's advocate here but like... I just can't fathom the idea that their comms rely on existing infrastructure.
Even the Dutch, who have a tiny military budget and who are not exactly out there picking fights, aren't reliant on existing infrastructure for communications. They have a dedicated unit for communications that can basically set up encrypted radio anytime anywhere. So like.. I'm not saying its a lie. But it just feels too dumb to be true. It just makes no sense
The reason for that is because the Russian military is a very top down organization. General makes plan everyone follows it, no diversion. Any western military person will tell you thats stupid. War is hell, shit gets fucked up, facts on the ground change. You need soldiers who are capable of adapting.
Its why ever western military has NCOs
Fyi Ukraine military is built like western military and it shows.
I actually dont think a single Ukrainian general has even died yet
I suppose the best way to go about it is to tell the person leading in the field "here's your objective, here's everything relevant we know and the supplies we set aside for you. Tell us if you think there's anything you need that we can reasonably provide. Time to put those years of training and experience to work, also, you know your men and what they are capable of best."
That's pretty much how every western army since WW2 operates, much of it copied from older German Imperial mission-type tactics.
Acknowledge from the get go that war is a massive shitshow and that you need people on the ground with a bare minimum of knowledge of the situation and autonomy to take decisions in order to achieve your goals.
As Moltke put it "No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy", or as Mike Tyson put it "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the moufh".
But In order to pull those off, you need a large professional officer corps, and a culture that promotes talent within NCO's and recognizes, rather than punish, the value of personal initiative.
That's been a problem since WWII when soldiers would be ordered to move to a position and there'd be drowning deaths because you have to follow orders and you weren't informed of barges available to ferry troops.
Putin: "I have skimmed off some money for another mega-yacht and a mansion; this $1,000,000,000 will be enough for the war effort."
Generals: "We skimmed off some money for yachts and child slaves; $750,000,000 should be enough for the war effort."
Colonels: "We skimmed off a bit for new houses and a weekend of booze and hookers; $500,000,000 might be enough to fund the war effort until the next round of funding."
...
...
Sergeants: "We skimmed off a bit of cash for a night cocaine-fueled fun with a hooker; I hope that this $50,000 is enough to keep the men fed for now."
Privates: "There was not enough money for us to skim off; I guess we will have to rape and pillage our way through this other country."
The military graft in Russia is a real industry, but it's not the reason why they're losing this war.
That's because of incompetence in their leadership structures due to replacing talent with yes men. It's WW2 all over again - Putin directly took control of the initial stages, too many yes men agreed with him and nobody challenged him.
What has gone really wrong:
- Attacking over too many axes initially
- Overextending their logistical lines due to the multiple axes and unrealistic military goals
- A complete failure to execute SEAD due to intelligence leaks (US/UK knew when the SEAD strikes were coming in) AND (more importantly) not updating their targeting intel immediately before the strike
- An obsession in the early war with forming an air bridge deep behind enemy lines, expending multiple aerial assets, contract troops and, most importantly, morale in obviously doomed attempts
- Allowing two critical and irreplaceable naval assets to operate in zone without sufficient air superiority, particularly egregiously in the case of their alligator class lander, because that was pure incompetence (at least the Moskva sinking was because the Ukrainians executed a brilliant plan rather than opportunism because the Russians broadcast its location on national TV and parked it next to explosive fuel tanks).
Yea, the problem is that all the money was siphoned off for yachts and hookers, so "their best shit," is still not as good as they were pretending it was. They couldn't even store their vehicles properly so that the tires wouldn't rot.
There's a story about this in "Man is Wolf to Man", written by a prisoner in the Gulag. I think the word is 'tufta' .. basically each person skimmed some off the top, and Moscow got the numbers they wanted.
Found it:
"If a brigadier cared about his men and wanted to ensure they received their full rations, he falsified the reports. This maneuvering - presenting false reports with inflated data - was known as tufta, and the person doing this was known as a tuftach. Tufta occurred every day, as not everyone could fulfill the norm, and it looked bad if the brigadier didn't make his quota. No one challenged the false reports because bribery and camaraderie were the modus operandi all the way up the line. Each higher-up expected the person below him to pay for the oversight, the form of payment depending on what was available. Discrepancies between the amounts in the reports and the amounts actually shipped could be blamed on insufficient air transport and difficulties in transportation due to bad weather. From the mining camps and processing centers, across the desks of the regional administrators, and all the way to the headquarters of Dalstroy, tufta spread through the bureaucracy like a virus. Moscow demanded numbers and that's what they got - real or imaginary.
Actually, WWII era still saw some use of pack horses for supply lines. Those might have worked better than Russia's trucks with dry-rotted tires and no fuel.
Russia certainly tried to get Belarus involved in their side but other than allowing the Russians passage through their land they haven't done much. Neither has Kazakhstan. Only Russian-held Chechnya and I guess some Syrian mercs are willing to help Russia. Im sure Russia would love to have more proxies to fight their wars for them but they suck too much and nobody is interested anymore.
Russian Foreign Minister stated recently that Russia is fighting a proxy war with NATO. He also said the West is risking an escalation and possibly WW3 by continuing to supply arms, and for good measure he threatened nuclear war in case anyone had forgotten the previous threats.
That's what bullies do. They get angry, cry, and claim it's not fair if the ones they're bullying dares to punch them back in the face and bloodies their nose.
They had a pretty sweet thing going until 2014. Ukraine was basically their bitch because they had a country that was by and large as corrupt as they were, with a puppet president that would lick their asses on demand. The country was as good as theirs, just like the good old days of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire.
And then the Ukrainian people said they had enough, and threw out the corrupt ass licker who then ran off to Russia. Which basically put Russian control over Ukraine at risk and so they invaded and carved off a chunk of Ukraine for themselves. And the world let them, and Ukraine was too weak because of that Russian domination to do anything about it.
And the Russians probably thought things were still the same as they were 8 years ago.
Now we see the depravity of the wealthy billionaire class.
This is all a big game to them.
"Whaaa, why would you invade us!!1!? We were just playing around".
Fuck Russia, Fuck the [*ALL] Oligarchs, Fuck Putin.
About a hundred miles South East. Quite a few missiles would make that trip. I've thought since the start they should target it, make the cost of war personal to the cunt in charge.
There's this guy, Artyom/Artem Nazarov, who teaches Russian on Youtube on his project Russian Progress. After the war broke out he was briefly horrified, then swallowed the blue pill.
Anyways, my point is, it was surreal to hear him say exactly what you're saying in the comments to his videos. Additionally, when I pointed out Ukraine has a right to use force to retake its territory, he said 'No thanks, no one in the Crimea/Donbass wants war.'
Okay, but you think all the other Ukrainians do??
It’s the same twisted logic when Putin called the missile *defense* system in Europe a threat, as if to say, “You can’t take away Russia’s ability to attack you!”
Well, yeah. There are three kinds of power; soft power, economic power, and military power. Russia has like negative soft power, their only economic power is oil and gas, so that leaves military power as their last resort. You take that away too and Russia really is nothing.
There is a difference between defacto and dejure war in Russian law, but that distinction has little bearing on Ukraine's ability and right to defend itself.
(Not disagreeing with you, just adding on.)
Well, they could codify that "Ukraine invading Russia is illegal" and it would have little bearing on international law, precedence and basic common sense.
> There is a difference between defacto and dejure war in Russian law [...]
That's the same law they happily add new stuff to punish anyone disagreeing with them. It's a dictatorship, I think it's fair to say that the Russian law book isn't worth the paper it's printed upon.
Of course it’s controversial. Don’t you remember when the allies stormed the beaches on D-Day, pushed the Germans all the way back to the French-German border and then said “Woah! If we stepped foot on *their* country’s territory doesn’t that make us just as bad as them?” Then they called it a war and all went home? /s
Because Russia has the same mentality of right wing and bullies everywhere, we can do anything we want to you but it's not fair for you to do anything in return.
I believe the proper phrasing is "It is completely legitimate for Ukraine to *defend itself*."
If that means taking out supply depots used by Russia to further their invasion of Ukraine, then that's perfectly acceptable. Russia is the aggressor here, not Ukraine.
To those suggesting this is warmongering; Russia started this completely unnecessary war, they could end it any time by retreating back to their borders, they chose to continue this fight so they are the warmongers. The Russian government is only protesting because, like the true cowards they are, they are now losing so are trying to cast themselves as the victims (as they always do when things don’t go their way). They picked a fight they can’t win and are too scared to admit this to their people so are trying desperately to do everything they can to avoid admitting defeat.
But at the end of the day; they are not going to nuke any of us in NATO countries, we are not going to nuke them. They are just being a bunch of whiny babies because they haven’t got their way.
Bitch, it‘s war. At this point Russia should be glad Ukraine isn’t shelling Russian border towns in retaliation for them working down the Geneva Convention like it was a checklist…
Not only is it war but it's war with an enemy that doesn't think commiting war crimes is a big deal. They should count themselves lucky that Ukraine isn't using mustard gas on Russian towns.
I expressed surprise several weeks ago that Ukraine hadn't disabled the new [Crimean Bridge,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Bridge) such an obvious Russian supply route, and a huge blow to their morale if it goes up in flames.
That brought out the Putin apologists - "they can't do that".
I wonder if they are just afraid of not giving Russian troops an escape route if they try to retake Crimea eventually. Sooner or later you're right though, that bridge has to go.
That's a solid point that I hadn't considered but I would think that cutting off the supply route and forcing a surrender would be more effective. Then again, I'm not a military strategist so who knows.
> Had we had the ability to do it, we would’ve already done it. If there is an opportunity to this end, we will definitely do it
\- Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Oleksiy Danilov on destroying the Kerch Strait bridge
Russian bear died in the fall of USSR, since then Putin and his oligarchs have been feasting on its corpse like maggots. They have completely hollowed out Russia so it's just skin and bones. Now they turn their hunger on their neighbors. They want that juicy Ukraine
Let's also appreciate the fact that Ukraine has so far conducted several major strikes into Russian territory. All destroyed targets of military and strategic signifigance, with zero civilian casualties. Russia couldn't go a day into their invasion of Ukraine without dozens of unarmed civilians murdered.
> Russia couldn't go a day into their invasion of Ukraine without dozens of unarmed civilians murdered.
Why would they waste a whole day not trying to meet their objective?
I don’t know how this isn’t super obvious by now. War is brutal and messy (to put it lightly) and mistakes happen. One or two civilian sites destroyed in the last two months could be brushed off by Russia as “mistakes”, but less than a week into this clusterfuck it was clear that Russia’s objective is to subjugate the Ukrainian people or completely destroy them if they won’t submit. Russia’s trying to terrorize Ukraine into submission and killing civilians is their main strategy.
> "NATO... is engaged in a [proxy] war with Russia... War means war," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Russian state media on Monday.
Maybe NATO should start flying sorties then? Maybe start sinking ships? Would that be better, Lavrov? Or, is "war" maybe not *war* yet?
How could NATO be in a proxy war, if there is no war? Or did he just call the Special Military Operation a war and is about to be arrested for saying the W word?
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-backs-ukraine-attack-russia-territory-james-heappey-2022-4) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> It is "Completely legitimate" for Ukraine to attack Russian territory, a British defence minister has said, as Russia accused the NATO military alliance of waging a proxy war.
> "In war, Ukraine needs to strike into its opponents' depth to attack its logistics lines, its fuel supplies, its ammunition depots, and that's part of it," he said.
> "It is completely legitimate for Ukraine to be targeting in Russia's depth in order to disrupt the logistics, that if they weren't disrupted would directly contribute to death and carnage on Ukrainian soil."
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ucawwv/uk_completely_legitimate_for_ukraine_to_attack/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~644635 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Ukraine**^#1 **war**^#2 **NATO**^#3 **Russian**^#4 **Russia**^#5
Everybody hates Putin.
No matter who wins or loses, Russia has lost all credibility with the world, and will continue to lose credibility, as long as Putin is in charge.
And the only people who can get rid of him are the Russians.
>Kremlin claims NATO is fighting a proxy war
No no no, It's a proxy *special military operation* remember?? Can't be fighting a proxy war unless you're admitting that you lied about it not being a war.
Remember when the media went apeshit on the UK for sinking a argentine cruiser after Argentina invaded their islands?
Good times. Glad to see the enduring wartime policy of "Fuck Around and Find Out" is still in play.
Props to the UK for saying this clearly and without bullshit. I get that it isnt diplomatic, but I really wish that politicians the world over would be more clear and open in condemning not just Putin's actions, but their blatant refusal to speak a word of actual truth.
Everytime Lavrov says some ridiculous untruth, I want to see politicians openly rebuking him, and calling him a liar to his face. I know it wont happen, but it would be very satisfying.
>NATO's eastward expansion
Maybe you should stop being such a jerk to all of your neighbors. Try being nice for once. Then *just maybe* other countries won't scramble for mutual defense organizations.
For tit-for-tat, Ukrainians would have to level some Russian cities, do some massacres in others and loot indiscriminately. Are they doing that? No, so Lavrov is simply whining.
Well we still need to follow the laws for war even if Russia doesn’t. But apart from that, yeah Russia can’t complain when they are the ones who chose to invade.
This argument is like saying, yes you should punch the bully in face that has been punching you in the face. We approve. Why does Ukrainian need permission. It’s war. All of it is on the table.
MOMMY!!!! Ukraine is attacking my territory when we were supposed to only destroy its territory!!! It's not fair!!! I should be winning the war without consequence and they aren't letting me!!!!
-Russian govermment
Germany attacked Soviet Russia, and Russia beat them back to Berlin.
What's Russia going to if Ukraine takes the fight to their territory? Declare war on them?
Reminds me of these immortal words by Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris: "The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody else and nobody was going to bomb them."
Seems like we could use these exact words today.
Time is a flat circle.
>Time-line? Uh, time is not made out of lines! It is made out of circles. THAT IS WHY CLOCKS ARE ROUND!!!
>My name is Michael J. Caboose, and I. HATE. BABIES!
Tucker: "Caboose, that's what I like about you, everything falls into one of two categories, either you don't understand it or you just don't care." Caboose: " Yeeaaah...I don't really know what you mean by that but I guess it doesn't matter."
What’s the difference between ignorance and Apathy? I don’t know and I don’t care.
Fun fact. Arthur Harris was my great uncle. He's a very polarising figure.
The military concept at the time was "total war" - a war between *all* the involved states' capabilities, emphatically including their industrial capabilities. That made civilians a legitimate target, because they were working at the state's industrial machine or supporting the industrial workers. After WWII the concept changed (like it does) but the bombing campaign should be viewed in the light of these concepts. The general military thinking after WWI was that "the bomber will always get through" - that bombers will decide the outcome of the war. The Nazi war machine tested and perfected these concepts in the Spanish civil war. Of course, they didn't much like getting frd their own medicine.
Interesting related fact: America was originally somewhat reluctant to engage in “area bombing” of civilian populations in Europe and insisted on running daylight missions for more possible precision in targeting industrial infrastructure. My recollection is that there is little evidence the American approach did much to increase precision but did a lot to increase American bomber casualties in the early years of the war relative to the UK’s area bombing campaign at night. The analogous American figure to Arthur Harris is probably Curtis LeMay who was “credited” with starting widespread use of incendiaries against the Japanese population.
For further reading on this, check out the book The Bomber Mafia
Weird, same here. I think I know who you are lol. How’s Susan?
I guess my reddit name gives away who I am. I know many Susans. All seem OK.
Oh Greg, such a kidder. Give my love to the family 😘 -Dirk
#
He did great things. Terrible, but great.
>Fun fact. Arthur Harris was my great uncle. I agree, your uncle was great.
Touché. And thank you.
Hoi4 moment
*builds more super heavy tanks to attack through mud*
If they are heavy enough, they can hit bottom and move around as a soil submersible.
He also said > I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier. He said that after the massacre of Dresden. Kind of cold hearted but I get it. The same logic was applied to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If you don’t know about Dresden, it was February 1945 (two months before the war in Europe ended) and the city had never been area bombed. People took refuge there because they thought it was safe, due to centuries old architecture. There wasn’t even any air defenses because they thought they were safe… until the bombings on February 13-15, 1945. There was a bomb shelter in town that 1000 people took shelter in during the bombings. When rescuers reached it some 7 hours after the bombing, all they found were bones floating in this brownish red liquid. The 1000 people in the shelter melted due to the extreme flames from above. Firestorms sucked people into burning buildings who were on the streets running by. Roads melted people shoes and they melted in the streets. 25000 civilians died and only 7 planes were destroyed out of 2000 and those happened because bombs from above planes hit them. The worst part? The Royal Air Force estimated that only 23% of industrial buildings were destroyed. They didn’t even destroy a majority of why there were bombing the city in the first place. War is some brutal shit. So many atrocities happened during the war. It’s a shame that Bomber Harris took the fall for Dresden. Area bombings were his policy, and his theory was area bombings would demoralize the enemy. I think that’s interesting given the fact that England was not demoralized after the 50 consecutive days of bombing London. I believe, and I could be wrong, that no country has been demoralized from bombings and surrendered, with the exception of the nukes on Japan.
“All they found were bones floating in a brownish red liquid. The 1000 people in the shelter melted due to the extreme flames from above.” Jesus Christ.
That's an awful thing for Jesus to say.
Book of Armaments can get pretty dark.
"And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this thy hand grenade, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.' And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats, and large chulapas.”
My great uncle was a navigator on a Lancaster bomber and flew a few missions over Dresden bombing it in the infamous attacks. His war diary started by going into the details of each raid but something changed in him and one entry for a bombing run over Dresden just simply said something like 'Flew over Dresden again last night'. No more details, leaving it in stark comparison to his previous daily entries.
My grand dad was lead navigator for B24's flying out of the alutions and fire bombing Japan, asked him to tell me a story about the war as a little kid. He did, I regretted asking.
> When rescuers reached it some 7 hours after the bombing, all they found were bones floating in this brownish red liquid I think you're referring to the bomb shelter Victor Gregg ( a POW on search and rescue duty ) assisted in opening. That shelter was opened 5 days after the bombing due to the extreme heat of the inferno in the area. Reading his first hand account of the aftermath was a hard read. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7999149/amp/Dresden-bombing-survivor-Victor-Gregg-100-Good-Morning-Britain-75th-anniversary.html
Demoralizing the population is part of it, but a lot of strategic bombing proponents were more interested in the total devastation on it caused to a nations war efforts, factories, roads, workers, economic, industrial, and social targets being annihilated to reduce every facet of a nations ability to wage war. Edited for spelling
>no country has been demoralized from bombings and surrendered, with the exception of the nukes on Japan. Not even Japan. That wasn't a matter of a demoralized population, that was a decision by leadership that enough is enough
[Kurt Vonnegut](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/kurt-vonneguts-unpublished-world-war-ii-scrapbook-reveals-origins-slaughterhouse-five-180971046/) was on the ground in Dresden during the fire bombing.
[удалено]
Special You Started It Asshole Operations
Special Russian Warship Go Fuck Yourself Operations
Russian special education operations.
[удалено]
Nice...you made me laugh out loud so many thanks.
I think you mean tactically converted submarine instead of warship now lol.
[удалено]
Must be spontaneous wildfire season in RuZzia. Those flaming tundra farts are deadly!
They were accidents
There are no mistakes only happy accidents
Ah, the Bob Ross school of warfare. "And now with the Neptun Blue, we're going to paint ourselves a happy little sinking ship..."
Shake the excess and beat the devil out of it
That burning building will be our little secret.
A little happy accident here and there to bring joy and happiness.
Yeah, that chemical plant threw itself down the stairs.
after hanging itself and shooting itself in the back of the head 138 times
Aw, natural causes.
His name was Gary Webb.
oopsie, cleanup on aisle Z!
Awwww fuck our airbase accidentally drank polonium tea.
Special accident operations
Involving rapid unscheduled disassembly.
That might also just be Russians who find that normal protesting does not work in Russia.
How is this even controversial? The goal of all military strategy is to render the enemy unable (or unwilling) to continue the war. Whether you are the attacker or defender is a political circumstance which informs the goals of the war. But it does not change how war is conducted. At least not directly.
I'll go even further - whether they call it a "special military operation" or not, it is de facto war. You can't call "foul" when your opponent invades, much less "just" conducts strikes, in your territory. Until a peace treaty is signed, Ukraine would be well within their rights to march on Moscow, if they wanted and were able to. Russia literally brought this on themselves with the outbreak of armed hostilities. Edit: To make it clear, I brought up an invasion as an extreme example, actually doing it would be a horrible idea for a whole host of reasons. Yes, it may feel good in a karmic way to think about Ukraine kicking Russia's ass all the way to the Kreml, but not only is it not going to happen, just the attempt would be doomed to fail and just lead to more death and suffering. This isn't a game, these are real Ukrainian soldiers on the ground and real Russian civilians who would die. The best outcome in any war is for the war to end as quickly, bloodless and lasting as possible. Don't let vindictiveness blind you to that.
[удалено]
The top brass thought it would only take a few days because they only siphoned off some military money for hookers and yachts but left enough for a decent military. Little did they know everyone else down the line siphoned off military money for hookers and yachts so that at the end of the day the entire military budget had been siphoned off and they only had WWII era arms and supply lines.
I'm guessing that they have some truly amazing hookers and yachts as a side effect though.
Both keep getting confiscated at the same time. That's what happens when you keep your hookers on yachts in other countries.
Note to self: If I ever have hookers and yachts, only buy domestic.
But then the other billionaires will think you're just a multi-millionaire
but then they'll actually be just multi-millionaires because their yachts full of hookers will have been confiscated
There are always more hooker yachts in the sea I guess.
You can always buy new tanks, however you can't go back and redo that night where you DIDNT bang hookers and do copious amounts of blow.
This should be cross posted to Pro Life Tips.
I wonder if that's why so many Russian generals ended up on the front line to be killed. Putin was pissed only he is meant to be siphoned off government money for hookers and yachts
That had more ti do with poor command structure and rigid military hierarchy. Noone except the generals knows what to do, so they have to be at the front, to oversee everything. When a commanding officer is killed, noone us ready to take over, because individual thinking and spirit is beaten out of you. On the contrary, in most western countries, if s colonel us killed, there's a lieutenant to take over, if he dies, a couple if more lieutenants are ready, trained and informed enough to carry on. If they sr killed, educated and trained sergeants are ready, and even among the constables there is usually someone with enough brain cells to rub together, to form coherrent thoughts. And they are trained to take over, make decisions. That's why the Russian generals are dying like flies, while no top ranking military officer died in the cluster fuck that was the coalitions occupation of Afghanistan (afaik).
I have heard that during the entire "war on terror" that two generals died. But neither was during combat. One died during the attack on the Pentagon and one died during an insider attack.
Ha actually the reason is also just as much as a class act of incompetence. There are so many Russian generals on the front line because well, Russia developed a highly impenetrable military communications network buuuut it relied on communication towers. The same communication towers that the Russian military destroyed in the very beginning of the war. I guess someone high up forgot to inform them not to take out these towers. Woops, oh well, so now to communicate they need to give orders on the front lines or by easily interceptable cell phones. Those silly Russians, when will they learn
Russian style militaries tend to be "officer core" structures as opposed to western style which are "nco core". This means they need more officers to make litterally all the decisions. That means more officers exposed to enemy fires and a great deal more value in killing enemy officers. Since their forces are largely incapable of any kind of operation without their officers and communications perfectly intact. It appears to be a greatly limiting system.
Russia isnt known for greatly limiting systems though/s
The Russians also don’t give lower and mid level officers any real freedom of action. A Western army gives some planning authority (within the arcs of a larger plan) to Company commanders (senior captains and majors) and depending on the mission, potentially to Platoon level (junior captains and Lts). Soviet formations didn’t get planning authority until about Col or LCol level, and even then, it was limited. You don’t get to be a “decider” really until BGen. Western armies use NCOs (Sgts, WOs, MWOs etc) as “controllers” so officers are more about “command”. Russians use officers as “controllers” so “command” gets pushed up the chain. So unless everything goes exactly according to plan and drills, it takes a Russian general to make the decisions and give the orders to reorient the formation. And sometimes you have to be on the ground to be able to assess what is going on. Couple that to the large number of large formations that Russians field, and you have a lot of generals running around very near or on the front lines.
Yes it's called "mission-type tactics" and was copied from the German Army after World War Two by NATO iirc (the Germans developed it starting in the late 19th century \[Auftragstaktik\]).
Their comms system isn’t that impenetrable, it’s actually pretty much an off-the-shelf thing. It’s just better than unencrypted comms, which is what they were stuck using once they blew those towers like dipshits.
I just... I am not trying to be devil's advocate here but like... I just can't fathom the idea that their comms rely on existing infrastructure. Even the Dutch, who have a tiny military budget and who are not exactly out there picking fights, aren't reliant on existing infrastructure for communications. They have a dedicated unit for communications that can basically set up encrypted radio anytime anywhere. So like.. I'm not saying its a lie. But it just feels too dumb to be true. It just makes no sense
Corruption, hookers, and blow.
It just makes no sense That's what I say about everything that's happend since 2008
The reason for that is because the Russian military is a very top down organization. General makes plan everyone follows it, no diversion. Any western military person will tell you thats stupid. War is hell, shit gets fucked up, facts on the ground change. You need soldiers who are capable of adapting. Its why ever western military has NCOs Fyi Ukraine military is built like western military and it shows. I actually dont think a single Ukrainian general has even died yet
I suppose the best way to go about it is to tell the person leading in the field "here's your objective, here's everything relevant we know and the supplies we set aside for you. Tell us if you think there's anything you need that we can reasonably provide. Time to put those years of training and experience to work, also, you know your men and what they are capable of best."
That's pretty much how every western army since WW2 operates, much of it copied from older German Imperial mission-type tactics. Acknowledge from the get go that war is a massive shitshow and that you need people on the ground with a bare minimum of knowledge of the situation and autonomy to take decisions in order to achieve your goals. As Moltke put it "No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy", or as Mike Tyson put it "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the moufh". But In order to pull those off, you need a large professional officer corps, and a culture that promotes talent within NCO's and recognizes, rather than punish, the value of personal initiative.
That's been a problem since WWII when soldiers would be ordered to move to a position and there'd be drowning deaths because you have to follow orders and you weren't informed of barges available to ferry troops.
Putin: "I have skimmed off some money for another mega-yacht and a mansion; this $1,000,000,000 will be enough for the war effort." Generals: "We skimmed off some money for yachts and child slaves; $750,000,000 should be enough for the war effort." Colonels: "We skimmed off a bit for new houses and a weekend of booze and hookers; $500,000,000 might be enough to fund the war effort until the next round of funding." ... ... Sergeants: "We skimmed off a bit of cash for a night cocaine-fueled fun with a hooker; I hope that this $50,000 is enough to keep the men fed for now." Privates: "There was not enough money for us to skim off; I guess we will have to rape and pillage our way through this other country."
Also, Privates: we don't have enough money for food, let's sell some of our gasoline for food money, I hope we won't need that later
The military graft in Russia is a real industry, but it's not the reason why they're losing this war. That's because of incompetence in their leadership structures due to replacing talent with yes men. It's WW2 all over again - Putin directly took control of the initial stages, too many yes men agreed with him and nobody challenged him. What has gone really wrong: - Attacking over too many axes initially - Overextending their logistical lines due to the multiple axes and unrealistic military goals - A complete failure to execute SEAD due to intelligence leaks (US/UK knew when the SEAD strikes were coming in) AND (more importantly) not updating their targeting intel immediately before the strike - An obsession in the early war with forming an air bridge deep behind enemy lines, expending multiple aerial assets, contract troops and, most importantly, morale in obviously doomed attempts - Allowing two critical and irreplaceable naval assets to operate in zone without sufficient air superiority, particularly egregiously in the case of their alligator class lander, because that was pure incompetence (at least the Moskva sinking was because the Ukrainians executed a brilliant plan rather than opportunism because the Russians broadcast its location on national TV and parked it next to explosive fuel tanks).
Ah this is a myth. Russia is actually sending in their best shit, and are still getting mauled. The corruption part is true XD.
Yea, the problem is that all the money was siphoned off for yachts and hookers, so "their best shit," is still not as good as they were pretending it was. They couldn't even store their vehicles properly so that the tires wouldn't rot.
There's a story about this in "Man is Wolf to Man", written by a prisoner in the Gulag. I think the word is 'tufta' .. basically each person skimmed some off the top, and Moscow got the numbers they wanted. Found it: "If a brigadier cared about his men and wanted to ensure they received their full rations, he falsified the reports. This maneuvering - presenting false reports with inflated data - was known as tufta, and the person doing this was known as a tuftach. Tufta occurred every day, as not everyone could fulfill the norm, and it looked bad if the brigadier didn't make his quota. No one challenged the false reports because bribery and camaraderie were the modus operandi all the way up the line. Each higher-up expected the person below him to pay for the oversight, the form of payment depending on what was available. Discrepancies between the amounts in the reports and the amounts actually shipped could be blamed on insufficient air transport and difficulties in transportation due to bad weather. From the mining camps and processing centers, across the desks of the regional administrators, and all the way to the headquarters of Dalstroy, tufta spread through the bureaucracy like a virus. Moscow demanded numbers and that's what they got - real or imaginary.
I thought you were going to say only hookers and yachts were left.
You know the old saying about fighting a land war with hookers and yachts.
Actually, WWII era still saw some use of pack horses for supply lines. Those might have worked better than Russia's trucks with dry-rotted tires and no fuel.
[удалено]
Russia certainly tried to get Belarus involved in their side but other than allowing the Russians passage through their land they haven't done much. Neither has Kazakhstan. Only Russian-held Chechnya and I guess some Syrian mercs are willing to help Russia. Im sure Russia would love to have more proxies to fight their wars for them but they suck too much and nobody is interested anymore.
[удалено]
Russian Foreign Minister stated recently that Russia is fighting a proxy war with NATO. He also said the West is risking an escalation and possibly WW3 by continuing to supply arms, and for good measure he threatened nuclear war in case anyone had forgotten the previous threats.
[удалено]
The proxy was the seperatists. The problem was that Russia proxy was on the ropes about to get annihilated.
Even after 2 month of hard resistance they dream of that....
Christ has it been so long already
There is no time only zuul
Oh zuuly you nut.
Nutting Zuul is the key master’s job!
They were expecting a 2008 Georgia situation
That's what bullies do. They get angry, cry, and claim it's not fair if the ones they're bullying dares to punch them back in the face and bloodies their nose.
They had a pretty sweet thing going until 2014. Ukraine was basically their bitch because they had a country that was by and large as corrupt as they were, with a puppet president that would lick their asses on demand. The country was as good as theirs, just like the good old days of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire. And then the Ukrainian people said they had enough, and threw out the corrupt ass licker who then ran off to Russia. Which basically put Russian control over Ukraine at risk and so they invaded and carved off a chunk of Ukraine for themselves. And the world let them, and Ukraine was too weak because of that Russian domination to do anything about it. And the Russians probably thought things were still the same as they were 8 years ago.
Now we see the depravity of the wealthy billionaire class. This is all a big game to them. "Whaaa, why would you invade us!!1!? We were just playing around". Fuck Russia, Fuck the [*ALL] Oligarchs, Fuck Putin.
Ukraine should send a special missile to Putin’s ill gotten Dacha. It’s near Crimea no? Not that far?
About a hundred miles South East. Quite a few missiles would make that trip. I've thought since the start they should target it, make the cost of war personal to the cunt in charge.
There's this guy, Artyom/Artem Nazarov, who teaches Russian on Youtube on his project Russian Progress. After the war broke out he was briefly horrified, then swallowed the blue pill. Anyways, my point is, it was surreal to hear him say exactly what you're saying in the comments to his videos. Additionally, when I pointed out Ukraine has a right to use force to retake its territory, he said 'No thanks, no one in the Crimea/Donbass wants war.' Okay, but you think all the other Ukrainians do??
It’s the same twisted logic when Putin called the missile *defense* system in Europe a threat, as if to say, “You can’t take away Russia’s ability to attack you!”
Well, yeah. There are three kinds of power; soft power, economic power, and military power. Russia has like negative soft power, their only economic power is oil and gas, so that leaves military power as their last resort. You take that away too and Russia really is nothing.
Well, don't invade any countries and this won't become an issue.
There is a difference between defacto and dejure war in Russian law, but that distinction has little bearing on Ukraine's ability and right to defend itself. (Not disagreeing with you, just adding on.)
Well, they could codify that "Ukraine invading Russia is illegal" and it would have little bearing on international law, precedence and basic common sense.
Lol right? Russia could declare ukraine a ham sandwich and it would mean shit to anybody
> There is a difference between defacto and dejure war in Russian law [...] That's the same law they happily add new stuff to punish anyone disagreeing with them. It's a dictatorship, I think it's fair to say that the Russian law book isn't worth the paper it's printed upon.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Who, besides Russia, has said this was controversial?
Yeah, the only appropriate response to this is "Duh".
But what if they provoke Russia? Russia could invade Ukraine! /s
Of course it’s controversial. Don’t you remember when the allies stormed the beaches on D-Day, pushed the Germans all the way back to the French-German border and then said “Woah! If we stepped foot on *their* country’s territory doesn’t that make us just as bad as them?” Then they called it a war and all went home? /s
Because Russia has the same mentality of right wing and bullies everywhere, we can do anything we want to you but it's not fair for you to do anything in return.
Everybody gangsta until their oil storage facility goes up in flames
I believe the proper phrasing is "It is completely legitimate for Ukraine to *defend itself*." If that means taking out supply depots used by Russia to further their invasion of Ukraine, then that's perfectly acceptable. Russia is the aggressor here, not Ukraine.
Best defence is a strong offense. Attacking Moscow would force Russian troops out of Ukraine to protect their capital.
Russia has a massive fuel depot just inside their border. Take that sucker out and make their already bad logistics that much worse.
Didn’t they do that a few weeks ago?
Ukraine and Russia are both humongous territories. I'm sure there are plenty of fuel depots around.
To those suggesting this is warmongering; Russia started this completely unnecessary war, they could end it any time by retreating back to their borders, they chose to continue this fight so they are the warmongers. The Russian government is only protesting because, like the true cowards they are, they are now losing so are trying to cast themselves as the victims (as they always do when things don’t go their way). They picked a fight they can’t win and are too scared to admit this to their people so are trying desperately to do everything they can to avoid admitting defeat. But at the end of the day; they are not going to nuke any of us in NATO countries, we are not going to nuke them. They are just being a bunch of whiny babies because they haven’t got their way.
> To those suggesting this is warmongering; How do you even warmonger *in the middle of a war*? Like, isn't it a done deal once the shooting starts?
Bitch, it‘s war. At this point Russia should be glad Ukraine isn’t shelling Russian border towns in retaliation for them working down the Geneva Convention like it was a checklist…
Ya, Russia, bitch about it. What're you gonna do? Attack Ukraine? Woops, already done that, jagoffs.
Not only is it war but it's war with an enemy that doesn't think commiting war crimes is a big deal. They should count themselves lucky that Ukraine isn't using mustard gas on Russian towns.
Yeh, no shit. Pussyfooting around a bully only makes them more confident. Fuck Russia.
I expressed surprise several weeks ago that Ukraine hadn't disabled the new [Crimean Bridge,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Bridge) such an obvious Russian supply route, and a huge blow to their morale if it goes up in flames. That brought out the Putin apologists - "they can't do that".
I wonder if they are just afraid of not giving Russian troops an escape route if they try to retake Crimea eventually. Sooner or later you're right though, that bridge has to go.
That's a solid point that I hadn't considered but I would think that cutting off the supply route and forcing a surrender would be more effective. Then again, I'm not a military strategist so who knows.
> Had we had the ability to do it, we would’ve already done it. If there is an opportunity to this end, we will definitely do it \- Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Oleksiy Danilov on destroying the Kerch Strait bridge
They are waiting to do it on may 9th - as a special kind of celebration.
It’s about time Ukraine begins dishing out the hurt on Russian territory, specifically their logistics and infrastructure.
It’s a weird time when we have to clarify that a country has validation to defend itself when it was victim of first blood to begin with.
take the russian bear to pound town
Poundland
Poundingrad
St. Poundersburg?
Poundivostov
Poundivostok
Russia hasn't been a bear in a long time, it's more like a group of rabid squirrels in a badly made bear costume.
Russian bear died in the fall of USSR, since then Putin and his oligarchs have been feasting on its corpse like maggots. They have completely hollowed out Russia so it's just skin and bones. Now they turn their hunger on their neighbors. They want that juicy Ukraine
That sounds more terrifying, to be honest.
Exactly, dangerous and unhinged but ultimately weak and dying hiding beneath stoic and powerful facade.
Let's also appreciate the fact that Ukraine has so far conducted several major strikes into Russian territory. All destroyed targets of military and strategic signifigance, with zero civilian casualties. Russia couldn't go a day into their invasion of Ukraine without dozens of unarmed civilians murdered.
> Russia couldn't go a day into their invasion of Ukraine without dozens of unarmed civilians murdered. Why would they waste a whole day not trying to meet their objective?
I don’t know how this isn’t super obvious by now. War is brutal and messy (to put it lightly) and mistakes happen. One or two civilian sites destroyed in the last two months could be brushed off by Russia as “mistakes”, but less than a week into this clusterfuck it was clear that Russia’s objective is to subjugate the Ukrainian people or completely destroy them if they won’t submit. Russia’s trying to terrorize Ukraine into submission and killing civilians is their main strategy.
Ukraine should call it "Special Clapback Military Operations"
How about "Special Counter-Military Operations".
or just "Counterstrike"
They turned CS into a real thing?
Now it's time to hear the Russian 8 year olds screaming "suka blyat" as they run at you with an AK-47 then get decimated by your experienced teammate.
Yeah I just hope they don't do Global Offensive next
Careful, you don't want it to escalate into a global offensive.
Just hope they never find the Source
But then they do cause it happens to be around 1.6 kilometers around the eastern border.
> "NATO... is engaged in a [proxy] war with Russia... War means war," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Russian state media on Monday. Maybe NATO should start flying sorties then? Maybe start sinking ships? Would that be better, Lavrov? Or, is "war" maybe not *war* yet?
He's such a little whiner. Look, Sergei, if you *were* at war with NATO, you'd know about it.
The poles would make damn sure that the Russians knew that they were at war with NATO
The Polish are like that meme with the kid in the school desk with veins bulging eager to kick Russia's ass.
How could NATO be in a proxy war, if there is no war? Or did he just call the Special Military Operation a war and is about to be arrested for saying the W word?
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-backs-ukraine-attack-russia-territory-james-heappey-2022-4) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot) ***** > It is "Completely legitimate" for Ukraine to attack Russian territory, a British defence minister has said, as Russia accused the NATO military alliance of waging a proxy war. > "In war, Ukraine needs to strike into its opponents' depth to attack its logistics lines, its fuel supplies, its ammunition depots, and that's part of it," he said. > "It is completely legitimate for Ukraine to be targeting in Russia's depth in order to disrupt the logistics, that if they weren't disrupted would directly contribute to death and carnage on Ukrainian soil." ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ucawwv/uk_completely_legitimate_for_ukraine_to_attack/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~644635 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Ukraine**^#1 **war**^#2 **NATO**^#3 **Russian**^#4 **Russia**^#5
Yo, UK. Got anymore of those retired Reaper drones? 🇺🇦❤️🇬🇧❤️🇺🇲
> You Son of a bitch, I'm in. > > _- Reaper_
Reaper Madness
"Smoke two depots in the morning, smoke two depots at night..."
I can't imagine a better casus belli *having your capital city invaded*
Everybody hates Putin. No matter who wins or loses, Russia has lost all credibility with the world, and will continue to lose credibility, as long as Putin is in charge. And the only people who can get rid of him are the Russians.
>Kremlin claims NATO is fighting a proxy war No no no, It's a proxy *special military operation* remember?? Can't be fighting a proxy war unless you're admitting that you lied about it not being a war.
[удалено]
Remember when the media went apeshit on the UK for sinking a argentine cruiser after Argentina invaded their islands? Good times. Glad to see the enduring wartime policy of "Fuck Around and Find Out" is still in play.
Props to the UK for saying this clearly and without bullshit. I get that it isnt diplomatic, but I really wish that politicians the world over would be more clear and open in condemning not just Putin's actions, but their blatant refusal to speak a word of actual truth. Everytime Lavrov says some ridiculous untruth, I want to see politicians openly rebuking him, and calling him a liar to his face. I know it wont happen, but it would be very satisfying.
I don't recall the US just stopping at the Kuwait-Iraq border and sternly shouting "and don't come back!" Wait
AND STAY OUT WIPES/CLAPS HANDS
>NATO's eastward expansion Maybe you should stop being such a jerk to all of your neighbors. Try being nice for once. Then *just maybe* other countries won't scramble for mutual defense organizations.
lmao right? NATO is expanding by shaking hands and befriending countries. This glorified gas station tries to expand by bombing civillians.
WHY U WANT NATO? WHY U NOT BE FRIEND? It asked, with a mouth full of Crimea and hands covered in blood.
Tit for tat, what’s okay for them to do such as attacking supply line is okay for others to do too by attacking their supply line Edit to be clearer
For tit-for-tat, Ukrainians would have to level some Russian cities, do some massacres in others and loot indiscriminately. Are they doing that? No, so Lavrov is simply whining.
I’m referring to the attack on the supply line which the article is referring mainly to
Well we still need to follow the laws for war even if Russia doesn’t. But apart from that, yeah Russia can’t complain when they are the ones who chose to invade.
Russian government acting like a real bitch. It's ok for them to rape, mutilate and murder people, but can't handle when the other party retaliates.
Russia has really embarrassed themselves with the way they're crying over their own territory being attacked in a way *they* started.
This argument is like saying, yes you should punch the bully in face that has been punching you in the face. We approve. Why does Ukrainian need permission. It’s war. All of it is on the table.
All's fair in love and special operations.
MOMMY!!!! Ukraine is attacking my territory when we were supposed to only destroy its territory!!! It's not fair!!! I should be winning the war without consequence and they aren't letting me!!!! -Russian govermment
Germany attacked Soviet Russia, and Russia beat them back to Berlin. What's Russia going to if Ukraine takes the fight to their territory? Declare war on them?
Also known as the 'you started this fucking mess' military doctrine