Posted on 01/03/2023 9:40:46 AM PST by Kazan
Have you ever played poker with a novice? I am talking about the person who does not understand the concept of a poker face. The rookie is dealt a hand of five card stud and breaks into a wide grin accompanied by a face flushed red as he or she gazes on at a full house. Only one teeny problem — the poker master on the other side of the table is holding four aces.
That is what happened today as Ukraine and the West reacted to news, confirmed by Russia’s own Ministry of Defense, that a U.S. Himars hit an improvised barracks of Russian soldiers and killed at least 63. Why the big deal? We have been told repeatedly over the last 8 months that Russia is suffering catastrophic casualties. What makes this so special and deserving of so much attention?
The answer is simple — this is the first time since the war started in February 2022 that Russia has suffered more than 50 casualties in one engagement in one day. How do I know? Because the Russian telegram channels lit up immediately when this happened. This is the first time I have seen that kind of reaction from the Russian side in the last 10 months.
The reaction to this missile attack highlights the stark contrast between Russia and Ukraine. The spokesman for the Russian MOD freely and frankly admitted to the “success” of the Ukrainian strike while the Ukrainian military — which is losing at least 200 men every day — covers up their losses and insists they are beating the hell out of Russia. The Ukrainians have told so many lies over the course of the last 10 months — e.g. the Ghost of Kiev, capturing a Russian border outpost, shooting down all Russian cruise missiles, driving the Russians out of Kherson, etc. — that this successful missile strike finally gave them something real they could celebrate.
But this attack is a lie. It was not carried out by highly trained Ukrainian troops sitting on an ample supply of Himars. This was done with Western supplied intelligence that identified the troop concentration and provided the coordinates for launching a precision strike. Moreover, it is highly likely that NATO troops were helping operate the Himar system. This attack actually is a sign of Ukrainian and Western desperation. It changes nothing in terms of the strategic picture.
The Saker beat me to it in making the correct observation that there is more to this Himars attack than the destruction of a company of Russian troops:
Still, NATO does not act just to show that it can act. There is a real, military, purpose behind these strikes. And it is not “just” to provoke Russia into some kind of response (not with tens and even hundreds of Russian missile strikes every day already taking place). . . .
Why would NATO want the Russian offensive sooner rather than later? In all its other actions, the AngloZionists have tried to draw out this war for as long as possible, so why would they want to make the Russians attack sooner rather than later?
Because the Russian General Staff is waiting for all the “ducks to be lined” up before attacking. Thus by trying to force the Russians into a premature attack date, NATO is, very logically, trying to prevent all the said “ducks” to be “lined up”. In other words, NATO is trying to force the hand of the Russian General Staff by increasing the pressure on the Kremlin to “finally take action”.
I make a point of watching how the media played this story today. I watched Sky News, Fox News and Al-Jazeera. All portrayed this as another major setback for the Russians and one more piece of evidence that the Ukrainian counter-offensive is achieving great success. It is mass delusion.
That said, it looks like the Brits are having a tougher time hanging on to that delusion. The top story on Sky News during the day was the escalating crisis of the U.K.’s National Health Service. Strikes by ambulance drivers and nurses are killing people and the grieving relatives are furious. Their focus is on the failure of the Tory Government to keep their loved ones alive. I did not see Brits clamoring to send more aid to Ukraine.
I think that January will be a turning point in the war in terms of Western support for Ukraine if there is harsh winter weather and worsening economic conditions, which will increase domestic political pressure on the NATO countries to take care of business at home.
“the AngloZionists have tried to draw out this war for as long as possible”
Great “anti-nazi” Russian sources you’re relying on there.
With 200 lost military men per day, Ukraine is no doubt losing this war.
Or so the writer wants us to believe.
Truth is that, if the invaded have lost that many, the invader has lost twice or more than that.
But, the ‘glee’ by the Ukrainians is about how many Russians were killed with ONE SHOT, and not about how many total the Russians have lost in the war so far. If one shot can kill that many Russians, imagine how many could be killed with a thousand of those shots. That’s what the writer doesn’t mention.
Furthermore, if Russia had been killing 200 Ukrainians per day, the number of losses by Ukrainians would have lost the Ukrainians the war by now. But, the invader is the one that doesn’t know the territory as well as the invaded, so, one can be certain that the Russians have lost at least twice as many as the Ukrainians. If Russia were to be doing as great as the writer and anti-Ukes wish, then, the war would have been won by Russia months ago.
And, the Ukes are not alone, and the Russians Russians know it, and the reason they mention the strike that killed their 63, is because they’re trying to point to the U.S. and it’s allies as the brutes that did the killing, not the Ukes. Russia is trying to win sympathy, and the strike by “the U.S.” is how they can get people like the writer above to do it for them.
Well, after years of reading FR for news not reported in the “mainstream media” I’ve never seen as much sheer nonsense as is now routinely posted here about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 🙄
“Have they ever reported the losses from the Moskva’s sinking?”
You mean from the completely planned and quite intentional transition of the Moskva from a surface vessel to a submersible, of course. All part of the plan!
Yes, you post a decent share of that twaddle, along with your fellow Azovnistas.
President Sniffer and his idiots are working to involve us in World War III. It won't start with Russians - maybe it'll start with Iranians... played off involvement in Ukraine.
Nooooo - that's what artillery is for.
Just to be clear, it’s OK for Iran to provide drones, but it’s bad for the US?
Honestly, this is payback for Korea, Vietnam, and every other place where Russian weapons have killed and maimed US troops.
The logic being used to defend Russia lately is mind boggling.
Of course, the response will be name calling and insults.
Yes, the pictures yesterday did not seem to go well with the story. The celebrations here among those who tune in everyday for their latest fix of death and destruction of “Ruzzians” was a little over the top as you would expect. I suspected that there was a “bit” of exaggeration going on. But by Telegraph/MSN standards... at least it was actually based on an actual event... which is an improvement compared to most of the time.
“’Hundreds’ killed as Ukrainian Himars flatten Russian barracks in one of war's deadliest strikes”
[... building itself could only hold 100-200 troops.]
Right... It was a 2 or 3 story school building. I don’t know how many were in there but it could easily hold much more than that. Stop being silly.
“the response was unusual, so obviously it can only mean what I want it to mean!”
No, it’s not the most troop deaths in one day. What makes it unique is that these soldiers weren’t killed on the front, in combat. Russia’s defenses failed to protect soldiers sleeping in their barracks.
Be careful what you advocate, warhawk.
Glad to see you back from Donetsk Oblast, where you could personally inspect the site and report back to us.
The constant Russian casualty numbers remind me of 70s SoS McNamarra’s VC death totals that day..
And I ain’t buyin’ it.
Of course, it’s not that hard for me because I dumped the MSM in 1997.
“which is apparently not a good thing in their view”
Gee, maybe the Russians should have considered that before they supplied weapons to every terrorist group and revolutionary movement that wanted to kill Americans during the 20th century?
On a related topic, I just finished season three of Jack Ryan. I think it was the best one by far. It came across as true Tom Clancy territory.
You wouldn't want to be a cookie in the middle of that particular circle...
Whatever.
The Russians are gonna do what they want.
More Russians will die. And that is fine with me. They are a brutal, paranoid, insecure people who add very little to the well being of the world. They have done nothing but slaughter their people and others for the past 100 years.
The fewer of them around, the better.
This was done with Western supplied intelligence that identified the troop concentration and provided the coordinates for launching a precision strike.
That drives home something I was thinking when I first read the OP - The American barracks in Beirut in the Reagan years. I believe it was 241 killed. Yes, it was:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/02/07/when-reagan-cut-and-run/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.