Posted on 10/14/2022 4:12:59 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
On Monday, Russia fired 84 missiles, many at Ukrainian civilian infrastructure targets, causing power outages in many cities. On Tuesday, Russia launched another 28 cruise missiles. And on Thursday, the Ukrainian Armed Forced General Staff said Russia had hit more than 40 settlements since the day before. In all, more than three dozen people were killed.
But no matter how many times Russia fires at Ukraine, pro-war Russian nationalists want more, even though targeting civilian infrastructure is potentially a war crime.
“It has to be done constantly, not just once but for two to five weeks to totally disable all their infrastructure, all thermal power stations, all heating and power stations, all power plants, all traction substations, all power lines, all railway hubs,” said Bogdan Bezpalko, a member of the Kremlin’s Council on Interethnic Relations.
“Then, Ukraine will descend into cold and darkness,” Bezpalko said on state television. “They won’t be able to bring in ammunition and fuel and then the Ukrainian army will turn into a crowd of armed men with chunks of iron.”
But the hawks, who are demanding publicly on TV broadcasts and on Telegram to know why Russia does not hit more high value targets, won’t like the answer: The Russian military appears to lack sufficient accurate missiles to sustain airstrikes at Monday’s tempo, according to Western military analysts.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
How many cruise missiles did the U.S. launch at Iraq on March 19-20, 2003?
Russia launched more PGMs in this war than the US did since its inception.
According to the same sources it was out of them since early March.
That's nonsense. Russia has NEVER had that many, period.
a damning observation is that Russia is now reduced to cannibalizing their S-300 AA systems
why? common sense suggests that the supply of high-tech missiles are running low
Why don't you post a list of Russia's military inventory Rat? You don't have a clue one.
“targeting civilian infrastructure is potentially a war crime.”
Nope. Or everyone in every war is a war criminal. Dresden,and Hiroshima anyone?
You wouldn't know common sense if it jumped up and kicked the toof out of your head.
If anyone thinks they are being told the truth about this war by either side, they are fools.
deny, deny, deny
How many accurate and targeted missile strikes do you think it would take to knock out the power and LG in Texas?
The poor Washington Post...will they never learn that what you publish will be on the internet forever...:-)
They can use biased sources (Ukraine, Western analysts) to insist that Russia lacks adequate weapons to destroy Ukraine’s energy system....
And try to suggest that targeting “civilian infrastructure” is a war crime despite the fact that we take out “civilian infrastructure” on the first day of every war we are in.
But, their perpetual whining about Ukraine’s war loss isn’t going to change anything. Russia has already destroyed much of Ukraine’s energy systems — 40% since the war began and that figure comes from data prior to the recent 2 day missile attack. There is no potential for that to be restored/repaired for the foreseeable future. And experts expect the already destroyed equipment to continue to deteriorate the system further. The recent huge fire at a plant in Kiev which caused further damage was caused by the missile attack from the day earlier. The energy situation in Ukraine is now in a long term break down.
Interesting article about who is actually paying for the weapons countries are sending. It looks like it is going to be more than just running out of equipment that will be holding back offers to Ukraine.
An EU fund meant to help countries replace weapons supplied to Ukraine has been unable to cover the surge in reimbursement claims - and it hasn’t even sent its first payment, Politico writes, citing diplomats.
Days after the start of the war in Russia, the EU created a €500 million fund encouraging countries to arm Kyiv and ask the EU to pay the bills. After examining the receipts received, Brussels decided that it could cover about 85 percent of the costs, according to three diplomats.
“Then the EU authorized an even bigger fund – it ended up being 1.5 billion euros. That’s when the receipts began to flow. Estimates show that the EU received so many requests that, according to its calculations, Brussels could only satisfy about 46 percent of the requests. “, - writes the publication.
According to diplomats, the sharp drop in the percentage of payments angered Poland, one of the largest arms suppliers to Ukraine and the main contender for compensation. Warsaw, according to diplomats, presented receipts worth 1.8 billion euros. For several days, the country blocked the final agreement on the payment of the second tranche of money, hoping to negotiate a higher rate.
“For them, less than 50 percent is too little, “ said one diplomat.
But Warsaw eventually relented, agreeing on Wednesday to a 46 percent fee, according to diplomats.
However, the waning payback scheme risks damaging the EU’s reputation as a reliable military partner, just as Ukraine is pleading with Europe for more weapons to help counter-offensive and fend off renewed Russian bombing. Already, the EU countries, Germany and France, are under fire. for not enough donation, while some smaller countries say they are running out of supplies, “ writes Politico.
14 killed, that’s some mighty targeting of civilians.
Not to mention that Russia has ten of thousands of NOS anti-ship missiles in stock, most can be upgraded to new guidance systems very cheaply.
If the US want to compete they need to pay a couple trillions to Raytheon and maybe they would be ready by 2050.
Not my job to do your research, Comrade Blackbird.
But for one time, and one time only, I'll indulge you.
In total, Russia had almost 7,000 medium- and short-range missiles (up to 5,500 km) at the beginning of the war. Almost half of them are low-precision missiles Kh-22, Kh-55, "Point-U" complexes.
At the first stage of the war, Russia mostly used Kalibr missiles (sea-based) and Iskander missile complexes. Less than the Kh-101 missile, it has several times announced the use of its latest development, the Kh-47 Dagger.
Since Russia did not expect a long war, it actively used these missiles, despite the fact that their stock was not too large (2,000-3,000 units). In May, the first reports appeared that the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is starting to look for missiles "on the side" - in China, North Korea and other dictatorial countries.
At about the same time, information appeared about the first use of Kh-59 missiles. This is an old Soviet rocket from the 80s, but it is quite accurate. The circular possible deviation is indicated as less than 10 m, but the USSR and Russia tend to exaggerate the real accuracy of their weapons.
The disadvantage of the X-59 is its short range - less than 300 km. That is, it can be applied only in the border areas or in the area of the Black Sea coast. It also carries the smallest charge (up to 300 kg) and is not capable of destroying a large object.
The Soviet X-55 and its more modern modification X-555 became an alternative to the Kalibr missiles at a longer distance. But these missiles can no longer be called highly accurate. For them, the circular deviation is 20–100 m.
Also at this time, the first confirmations of Russia's use of the Point-U complexes, which were officially decommissioned in the Russian Federation, appeared. Russia even for some time denied the use of these OTRKs.
"Point-U" is generally a weapon of mass destruction. It is capable of hitting manpower on an area of up to 30 hectares, depending on the type of warhead. In addition, the deviation of the missile can be up to 250 m.
In addition, the missiles for the Point-U complexes are usually very old and there is a high risk that the missile will not hit the target at all. That is, it is a very indiscriminate weapon that causes destruction on a large area. It must be understood that the Armed Forces also use "Points", but for them they choose large targets, at a considerable distance from civilian infrastructure. For example, ammunition depots.
Russia has already used about 3,000 missiles in Ukraine. It is difficult to say which ones. Most likely, there are not many Kalibr and Iskander missiles left in the Russian Federation. This is confirmed by the fact that Russia uses not only old and cheap missiles, but also new and expensive ones. In particular, P-800 Onyx anti-ship missiles worth more than $1 million per unit.
London, anyone?
Gotta actually hit the target first, instead of the apartment building and playground next door.
But Comrade Cathi, wasn't it one of Comrade Putin's stated objectives to "liberate" Ukraine and NOT destroy it?
Do you really thing that a missile carrying a 1000 pounds of explosive hitting within 10 meter radius (according to your data) is ‘inacurate’?:))
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.