1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country? 2.

1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
2. Why didn't Russia strike every seaport?
3. Why didn't Russia strike the presidential offices, legislative offices, and known personal residences?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Too expensive

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    1. Because even their best PGMs are too inaccurate
    2. No military aide comes in by ship
    3. See number 1

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    because their PGMs have CEPs measuring in kilometers

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Correction. Their **newly manufactured** PGMs. Older ones,with Ukrainian guidance systems, were very accurate, unfortunately

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
    because they thought it'd be over in 3 days and even if they wanted to, their strikes would not have been accurate enough to effectively cripple Ukraine's connection to NATO
    >2. Why didn't Russia strike every seaport?
    they did and failed miserably
    >3. Why didn't Russia strike the presidential offices, legislative offices, and known personal residences?
    der monkey probably wanted them intact for propaganda reasons

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    You need accurate long range missiles in large numbers to do that
    Plus what if they accidently hit a NATO asset and had to fight NATO too? That's too big a risk even for Putin

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because they were expecting to just roll in and seize Ukraine with all of its infrastructure intact, just like they did with the Donbass and Crimea.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Pretty much this. They didn't want to go full scorched earth carpet bombing mode on Ukraine because they themselves still believed they would be seen as unifiers of a common Russia. That obviously didn't pan out and now they are a bit fricked.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >They didn't want to go full scorched earth carpet bombing mode on Ukraine because they themselves still believed they would be seen as unifiers of a common Russia.
        "Mariinka was once a quiet bedroom community of 10,000 residents and tree-lined streets just west of Donetsk. " Bullshit the mass murdering and torturing and raping and looting Russians tried to smash what they could but little sick dying incompetent cruel stupid corrupt Russia could not smash enough to prevent their own incompetence loosing them the war they started

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Mariinka

          That was pretty late into invasion iirc and once "unify" mode obviously wasn't going to work. I don't think Putin was there telling the Wagner head to make sure raping and pillaging was at maximum intensity; that shit happened as Russia repeatedly conscripted and possibly misled criminals for their bidding.

          I'm just pointing out Russia didn't throw everything they had behind this invasion when it first started and we've been watching the slow bleed out with small wins and offensives since then.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Russia was exporting toddler rapists and mudering and torturing civiliand early on, Bucha massacre was March 2022 and one of many. It was deliberate and ordered from the top down as evidenced by the planned torture centres

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Russia didn't throw everything they had behind this invasion
            But they literally did and also tried mass murder and terror immediately as well

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >But they literally did and also tried mass murder and terror immediately as well

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            oh yeah, they didn't wanted to go scorched earth, this is why they started randombly bombing kharkiv with cruise missiles

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          looks like middle fricking earth

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            completely erased. Russia committed every warcrime possible (and within a month of invading) levelled entire towns even kidnapped thousands of children opened torture centres fired every missile they had and they still lost

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Donbass and Crimea
      But the infrastructure of those areas is in absolute shambles, not to mention the demographics. There is no point in taking anything intact if you are just going to ruin it in year or so.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because the wikipedia range of a weapon isn't necessarily the range it can actually hit and destroy a target within.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      usually its the other way around, the weapon performs better than published specs

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, American and European ones. Vatnik and chink ones not so much.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >stupid Westerners our R77/PL15 has double the range and speed of your Meteors and AMRAAMs
          >just check our published numbers on wikipedia why would we lie?

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They unironically thought that the Ukrainians either wouldn’t fight back. Weren’t some of the first units killed near Kiev wearing riot gear?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Near Kharkiv

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ah, sorry. I don’t follow the war that closely to be honest. I just remember the night the invasion started, there were reports of Russian riot cops getting killed.
        Regardless, they clearly though they’d be fighting an uprising/insurgency, and not a full blown uniformed army.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Don't apologise, I hears about Riot cops leading the charge to Kyiv too, personally I assumed they were present at both cities and probably Mariupol as well

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          In typical Russian fashion, it was a comedy of errors. There were some riot police that were sent to Kyiv with the intention of suppressing civilian unrest after the military secured the city. However, the police somehow arrived at Kyiv before the military did and just decided to try and enter the city anyways.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Apparently they got lost and, in true Russian fashion, since they were lacking comms and maps to make any other move, decided to BYLAT RUSH B straight to Kyiv right until they got smoked by some TDF units.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    assuming best case scenario happens and they do destroy a portion of a railroad, what stops anyone from repairing it in a timey matter?

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because Russia is a poor country that cannot create a significant number of modern weapons rapidly.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    First and foremost they can't find and fix those assets.

    They have limited pgm's and it's near impossible to destroy a whole road network

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because russia has limited amounts of PGMs that are inaccurate. Their intel gathering is also shit.

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
    Literally not possible, if there's anything the Soviets did well it's infrastructure, Ukraine's network is pretty extensive and even if a road or rail gets hit by a missile you can just reroute it and then fix it
    >2. Why didn't Russia strike every seaport?
    They did.
    >3. Why didn't Russia strike the presidential offices, legislative offices, and known personal residences?
    They were initially expecting Zelensky and other officials to flee the country. When that didn't happen they were already in bunkers so bombing the buildings made zero sense

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Literally not possible, if there's anything the Soviets did well it's infrastructure
      Then why are Russian roads so garbage?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Winter and thick, THICK mud. Its like NOreast winters but harsher and on worse, flatter ground. The water doesnt drain, just sinks.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        trains > roads especially if you are a communist

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          trains don't run to the front line vehicles do and Russia is out of both modern offensive capable armoured vehicles but also and more critically fuel tankers to supply them as well as lorries that can feed artillery. Lack of food and consumables like grenades and small arms munitions as well as medical supplies and no medivac are why mass desertion is next for Russia. No offensive capacity means mutiny for Russia when ordered on offense. Russia has lost the war

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >trains don't run to the front line
            Why do you think Bakhmut is one of the main offensive target by the russian? One of the major reason is that on the russian side, the railroad leads to a few miles from it, and there are multiples roads leading to it too.
            It’s an area where they can use trains to support the massive consumption of shells and fuel necessary for an attack.
            Pretty much the same for Vulhedar.
            The Red Army’s bastard offspring is just as dependant on railroads as their predecessor. It’s like an umbilical cord.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Why do you think Bakhmut is one of the main offensive target by the russian?
              Because the man who owns wagner does not get paid unless he takes it same situation for 8 months and if he does not get paid he goes broke

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The soviets did nothing well except kill and smash the teeth out of anyone who said they did nothing well. Soviet infrastructure?

        "Formerly the fourth largest lake in the world with an area of 68,000 km2 (26,300 sq mi), the Aral Sea began shrinking in the 1960s after the rivers that fed it were diverted by Soviet irrigation projects. By 2007, it had declined to 10% of its original size, splitting into four lakes: the North Aral Sea, the eastern and western basins of the once far larger South Aral Sea, and the smaller intermediate Barsakelmes Lake.

        By 2009, the southeastern lake had disappeared and the southwestern lake had retreated to a thin strip at the western edge of the former southern sea. In subsequent years occasional water flows have led to the southeastern lake sometimes being replenished to a small degree. Satellite images by NASA in August 2014 revealed that for the first time in modern history the eastern basin of the Aral Sea had completely dried up. The eastern basin is now called the Aralkum Desert."

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The soviets did nothing well except kill and smash the teeth out of anyone who said they did nothing well. Soviet infrastructure?

        "Formerly the fourth largest lake in the world with an area of 68,000 km2 (26,300 sq mi), the Aral Sea began shrinking in the 1960s after the rivers that fed it were diverted by Soviet irrigation projects. By 2007, it had declined to 10% of its original size, splitting into four lakes: the North Aral Sea, the eastern and western basins of the once far larger South Aral Sea, and the smaller intermediate Barsakelmes Lake.

        By 2009, the southeastern lake had disappeared and the southwestern lake had retreated to a thin strip at the western edge of the former southern sea. In subsequent years occasional water flows have led to the southeastern lake sometimes being replenished to a small degree. Satellite images by NASA in August 2014 revealed that for the first time in modern history the eastern basin of the Aral Sea had completely dried up. The eastern basin is now called the Aralkum Desert."

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          And remember all the barrels of anthrax and other assorted that was dumped in the Aral sea, due to the biological warfare center placed on one of the former Islands.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Actually its wierder than tham, see in teh first image here

            https://i.imgur.com/4ovZwyA.jpg

            [...]

            from 1977 there are a few islands? Well on one of them the Soviets built a really fricking evil biological warfare facility, every form of evil shit know, including anthrax. When the soviet union fell they mostly left it there...after all it was an island. The groundon it is spicy as well. The USA gave them money to clean it up but its Russia so frick knows if they did anyway as the Aral sea dried out (one of the great heinous crimes against the world by the communists along with their mass murders and lies) it meant that the top secret island could now be walked to. Even at the time of ISIS there was always a concern that that place would be where some nutter got a serious biological weapon

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    it takes like 5 minutes to repair a road or rail segment unless it's under constant bombardment

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      not if theres a nuclear ground burst, its nice and hot, in more ways than one, for a long time

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Even then, Ukraine's road & rail network was literally built to still function after nuclear blasts

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          and since all the maintenance money was stolen, none of Russia's nukes work anymore anyways

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    1.
    -Very expensive use of ballistic or cruise missiles.
    -Russian missiles have pretty poor accuracy and reliability, and their numbers are limited
    -A railroad is easy and fast to repair. Roads are even worse targets.
    -They did bomb a few stations, killing mostly civilians and achieving nothing except PR disaster (like in Kramatorsk).
    -They targeted Ukraine’s electric network, that was repaired within hours or days. Ukraine still has electricity months later and it only convinced the West to send massive amount of AA, largely reducing the effectivness of missile attacks and making the sky even more dangerous for the Russian Air Force.

    2. Russia did strike Odessa, Nikolayev, Berdyansk and Mariupol. It didn’t have much effect on the war in general.

    3.Russia didn’t strike the presidential offices, as it’s a step that has serious consequences (retaliations in kind, impossible to negociate a peace treaty, PR disaster with the West with more backlash). Mostly not worth it, and low possibility of actually killing Zelensky in the bunker underground. Local government buildings near the front were striken at the start of the war, it was a pretty PR failure achieving nothing.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
    Ukrainians had anti-air missiles, still do.
    >2. Why didn't Russia strike every seaport?
    Read above.
    >3. Why didn't Russia strike the presidential offices, legislative offices, and known personal residences?
    Read above.
    Why is it that every single post, without exceptions, using the facebook frog is some aggressively moronic shit that could be answered by reading articles for 2 minutes? It's like it attracts a certain type of lazy, clueless moron.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    1. They can't and couldn't back then

    2. Attacking international infrastructure would invite a bigger NATO response

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
    >Railways are this really complicated thing to fix
    Most of us are within a day trip of one or more vintage railways that are maintained exclusively by aged volunteers. Unless you're hitting a bridge or some other piece of infrastructure with a significant capitol investment railways can be repaired in hours.

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Pictured a war winning strategy for 2022. It keeps all the casualties in the pro-moronbandera part of Ukraine, and eventually locks out Ukraine from receiving reinforcements and resupply. And it focuses the entirety of Russian logistics on a single axis of advance, same with their firepower.

    Lock it down with mines and march towards the border, lock it down with minefields and barbed wire. And bam, no supplies, and runaways.

    The banderists will have to recruit their own people and see their own homes burned to the ground.

    The other strategy would be to invade and retake Ukraine the very second the Yanuk flees. Just mobilize everything and march in later that year. Take the entire fricking country.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      by seeing how Russia performed in Kyiv, the largest issue here is I doubt that Russia would be able to reach the Romanian border. Not only is West Ukraine much more hilly and wooded, but like you mentioned the Banderites living there wouldn't be too pleased with Russian occupation. I think in this situation the offensive would have stalled half-way and then Russia would have been forced to pull-back as they'd be overstretched

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's almost like modern warfare is just theater and they need the fight to last at least X number of rounds.

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Why didn't Russia
    "On March 5, I wrote a letter to the commander of the SMO (special military operation) grouping about the urgent need to allocate ammunition. On March 6, at 8 a.m., my representative at the headquarters had his pass cancelled and was denied access," Prigozhin said via his press service on Telegram.

    Reminder /k/ called this war as lost by Russia days ago on the basis that their logistics and offensives capability was crippled due to vehicles losses in combat. Since then we have seen mad max artillery tractors and Russian infighting over ammunition shortages. /k/ is never wrong......next you will see mass desertion and mutiny in the Russian frontline units. Russia has lost this war.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous
  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Why didn't Russia strike every seaport
    Well they have attacked Odessa with a bunch of cruise missiles and drones. Plus they've been shelling the frick out of Nikolaev and Kherson, both of which are port cities

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Russia has lost the war

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
    It might take vatnigs a long time to fix rail infrastructure, but even if you completely annihilated, say, 100 meters of track and left a massive crater in its place, a Western railway company can get that completely replaced with new substrate, ballast, ties, rails, and bonds in under a day. And if all you managed was to frick up a few ties and shatter some rail then it can be done in a few hours. Even if Ukraine didn't have the equipment to do it, western European nations would donate it on top of military aid.

    So why bother?

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Phase 1
    Gerasimov actually understands that the only chance there is if Ukrainians aren't going to fight, so the whole plan was built around shock and awe
    Kyiv in three days was very much the actual plan
    >Phase 2
    they would if they could

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    i love how people automatically think because the US can do it, everyone else also has the ability to click on a map and make that spot explode. spoiler: they don't.

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >1. Why didn't Russia strike every road and rail connected to a NATO country?
    incompetence, and probably political concerns that doing so would be seen as an attack on NATO and would result in the response that we see currently from NATO in supporting Ukraine
    >2. Why didn't Russia strike every seaport?
    They probably thought that they could take them
    >3. Why didn't Russia strike the presidential offices, legislative offices, and known personal residences?
    they probably thought that said residents would flee the country

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *