Ukraine vows a "potent response" if Russia mass strikes Ukrainian energy system this winter.
What capabilities does Ukraine have against the Russian energy system? Drone strikes in the vicinity of Ukraine and infiltrated sabotage groups from inside Northern Russia?
Pretty sure they have equal capacity to strike Moscow now, don't they?
Not really. They can hit it, but not to the same degree that Russia can hit Ukrainian cities.
Yeah but with russia you only need to hit moscow lol
>tfw the Ukies hit the last division-level toilet in Rostov
Sure, but if they make Moscow lose power for just one day the Russians will piss, shit, and cum all over themselves in rage and grief
If they're in Moscow. Everybody outside the city will chuckle and think the fags had it coming.
Moscovites are Russia's chosen people and must be protected at all costs
But only Moscow matters, all other places are just farmer hamlets
>imply 60iq vatniks can into farming, and are not looting white country’s instead
Pidorashka please.
As the other anons say, Russia is extremely centralized on Moscow. If Ukraine has enough capability to consistently strike Moscow they can hurt where it hurts the most and all the homosexuals kooked up there will suddenly feel cold for the first time in a while.
Hahaha
Do you actually believe this? Ukrainians can hit where they want now. Russians no.
Russians can't sperg missiles anymore, and Ukrainians can hit everything including the Russian Siberian sections
>Ukrainians can hit where they want now. Russians no.
>Russians can't sperg missiles anymore, and Ukrainians can hit everything including the Russian Siberian sections
How exactly and why arent they doing that then?
Ukrainians at this point can hit Russia with more ordnance where and when they want. Russians have problems with the air defense net work, sabotage, logistics, their missiles keep breaking apart or exploding on launch, and they burnt through everything in the last year.
Russia my personal guess will have most of it's water lines cut and electric grid going down in a month. The Ukrainians are going for Moscow's waterline system. If they cut that Russians freeze to death. It's how you destroy Moscow. Cut the waterlines which are all hyper centralized. Heating, water, food storage, electricity all stops once the waterlines go down. Power plants can't run without massive amounts of water btw. Russians could have done it to Ukrainians and this war would have been over last year but monkey is senile
Feb 2022: Russia will conquer Ukraine in 3 days
18 months later: Ukraine may strike Moscow with ballistic missiles but it's no big deal
Ukraine have been saving up suicide drones for this winter, so maybe.
You stopped hearing things hitting Moscow not because Ukraine stopped making them, but because they stopped sending them.
ATACMS + Drone swarm to damage the Kremlin?
ATACMS have been banned by Western countries to use against Russian territory afaik
Isn’t that just a rumor? I can’t find any official sources for the ban of western weapons being used to strike Russia proper. And I know Belgorod has been struck by shit, possibly long range missiles? Not saying you’re wrong, I’ve definitely seen this notion floated here before, but I can’t remember seeing an official source or anything
>not a single non-native weapon system was used for strikes inside russia
>proofs that they can't be used??????
Do you need to see signed agreements or something?
iirc one of the conditions for giving them himars was that they would only use them on targets in Ukraine, however…
>crimea is Ukraine
>the brits coincidentally gave them an unspecified number of rockets at the same time that they specifically said COULD be used on targets in Russia.
Just a coincidence I’m sure
The other thing to remember is that they actually have the ability to manufacture a small number of their own missiles hrim and a few others, so even if they never use a western missile on targets inside Russia, having them frees up capacity to use their own weapons on targets inside Russia
They are actually sending the drones everyday, but the jamming works good
>Jamming works
I doubt it.
They have as much in terms of air defense, if not more, but their offensive capabilities are not on par. They don’t have the ATCAMS and storm shadow in sufficient quantity to match Russia’s missile capabilities. But why would they? Terror bombing isn’t effective and might actually serve to harden Russian resolve, garnering more support for Putin and his special ed military operation
If they don't use such capabilities to take out any launch platforms involved it's idiotic waste of such capabilities when your energy system is being destroyed.
Correct.
Didn't Russia do this last winter and it had zero effect?
It made Russian leadership feel like big men
it had an effect in terms of forcing them to fix shit, but it didnt have the intended effect which was to terror bomb civilians into submission. Which has literally never worked in the history of mankind.
It's pretty hard to terror bomb people into submission. It can he done, but most of the time you just galvanize the enemy's hatred.
name one single instance of a terror bombing forcing peace in human history aside from the nuclear bombing of Japan. That is the only one I can think of where the terror bombing was not accompanied by an invasion with overwhelming force.
Not "Bombing" per se, but Ghengis Khan wiping out entire towns sure did cause nearby ones to surrender without a fight.
Same with Sherman's Burning of Atlanta which was the direct reason Savanna surrendered
>sure did cause nearby ones to surrender without a fight
This is a pretty good example. You'd have to make sure that the people who are surrender AREN'T the ones you actually bombed
Pretty hard to achieve nowadays, since the camraderie within a nation is more potent.
Plus, the information age makes it so you know how it happened. You can think up defenses. Back in WW2 Japan? A city just suddenly wasn't, and people were walking around with burns that never stopped. It was a nightmare hell that they had no way to consider defending against.
Russia, on the other hand, have had just about every war crime video taped, every attack vector defended at least partially, and their invasion is advancing backwards. Them being petty bitches by blowing up civilian infrastructure with shasneed drones? It just infuriates them and convinces the West to provide more gibs.
>Back in WW2 Japan
Yeah I was considering saying that the anything coming close nowadays would be nooooooks, but I'm not too sure about that
Maybe IF Russia has functioning nooooooooooooooooooks left and IF they hit some random city and IF the US doesn't retaliate and IF they threatened Kyiv next, the population might get scared enough to force Zelensky to peace out
There is no chance of that actually happening
There's no situation where nukes are used in conquest without strategic retaliation, since it destroys global order. You might get a false peace while weapons are moved into place, then there would be a huge sneak attack with weapons being held back only to kill survivors.
"We destroyed like 10000 of your vehicles, but you bombed our power plant, so we GIVE UP!" Only russians can think that this will work.
It shows what they're afraid of. They can't actually repair their infrastructure, since most of it is Soviet archaeotech. If their commiebloc power plant explodes, their entire oblast freezes to death. Being fed propaganda their entire lives, they think the Ukies will fare the same or worse, and as such, targeting generators makes perfect sense to them.
Bombing won't cause the destruction that razing a whole city will. With razing and killing everyone there are few survivors but regular bombing can never hit that number so the future victims will see their odds of survival positively.
Even in Japan, it was really the hopelessness in face of the power of nuclear weapons more than the actual bombing - American firebombing was much more devastating, but failed completely to make Japan submit
It was also US propaganda making the usual inflated claims--in this case, that the US had hundreds of Bombs, ready to go (it had a third, plus one every ~10 days after). This bluffed Hirohito into throwing in the towel rather than sticking by the hawks in the government and military that wanted to hold out until the invasion.
So…the threat of more bombings worked…?
Another factor to consider with the nuclear bombing of Japan (besides nobody but the US having them at the time) was that the US had already gutted out Japan's professional military and held its home islands under siege with uncontested air/naval supremacy; the only reason that the war was still going beyond that point was because the show was being run by suicidally zealous officers, who would sooner hand out sharpened bamboo poles to women and children than admit they fucked up.
The message behind the nukes then could be summarized as "there's no glorious death waiting for you so give it a rest already", whereas what Russia's doing today amounts to "please stop winning or I nook ook ook"
>the only reason that the war was still going beyond that point was because the show was being run by suicidally zealous officers, who would sooner hand out sharpened bamboo poles to women and children than admit they fucked up.
Oh, and why is that this sounds like you are describing Hamas?
Japan was already prepared to surrender before nukes were dropped. It was the zealous American xenophobic leaders who refused to accept conditional surrender (until they ran out of nukes and then did accept conditional surrender, albeit with slightly less conditions)
>Japan was already prepared to surrender before nukes were dropped
Rice covered fingers typed this post.
It's a historical fact, mouth-breather. They just weren't ready to do so UNCONDITIONALLY before the S*viets invaded.
>not unconditionally
NTA but what you are saying is that they were not, in fact, ready to surrender?
No, most of them didn't want to surrender and even the ones that did want to negotiate a peace wanted unacceptable terms (like retaining Manchuria) the exact details leading up to the bombs and eventual unconditional surrender can't be known because the Japanese deliberately destroyed any records prior to the allied arrival, but that horse shit about them wanting to surrender and avoiding a Soviet invasion of Manchuria is pure historic revisionism. The Japanese didn't even know the soviets were considering and invasion until June, and their nap didn't end until 46
>Japan was already prepared to surrender before nukes were dropped.
I suppose they might have surrendered more quickly if they didn't want to get nuked. It's like when one of America's future doctorjoggers gets shot for chimping in a No Chimping Zone. His mother can make up all sorts of stories & fairy tales about how he wuz an good boi and dindu wai him get shooted when he were all prepared to be an doctor ... but none of that bullshit will bring him back from the dead. If he didn't to be deaded, he should have stopped chimping a lot sooner.
Lol the Japs signed an unconditional surrender and at no point were any of their wants taken into account. Even later when trying to speak up they were firmly reminded to shut the fuck up. You can read all about this in the countless books written about Japan following the war.
Operation Linebacker
American civil war
Gulf war 1 and 2
Afghanistan invasion
Shock and awe is literally a terror technique designed to break the military apart, the military then turns on the population and invaders as they go insurgency mode.
Bombing German cities made Germany expend the Luftwaffe in endless one-sided sorties. Forcing Ukraine to park AA near strategic facilities will keep them away from the front. Russia's big mistake was underestimating how quickly we could backfill Ukraine's Soviet era SAMs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_bombing_of_Rotterdam
The nukes didn't get the Japanese to surrender, you imbecile, R*ssia's invasion of Manchuria did. If the firebombing of Tokyo (which killed more people than the nuking of Nagasaki or Hiroshima) didn't make them surrender, what would make you tools think that the nukes did? Is this simply what Americlaps tell themselves to justify their war crimes?
>the firebombing of Tokyo (which killed more people than the nuking of Nagasaki or Hiroshima)
It's not an "or", it's an "and". Tokyo killed more than Hiroshima and Nagasaki together.
Yeah they did. Sigh.
"Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization."
The Emperor of Japan clearly stated they did. Tell him about his country you brown shit.
And he nearly got couped for it in the Kyūjō incident
He used nukes as justification for surrender so he doesn't get couped, but akshully Manchuria was a bigger problem militarily
The use of atomic weapons was a horrific war crime, and it did convince the Japanese to surrender on less favorable terms that they initially offered. The invasion of Manchuria is what made AMERICA accept the Japanese’s conditional surrender, out of fear of Soviet gains. The invasion itself had nothing to do with a Japanese surrender, and the fact that homosexual communists think it did is a testament to their own lack of education
The Manchurian invasion contributed to Japan's surrender for one factor above all: Japan was desperately hoping Stalin would act as an intermediary to broker a negotiated peace. He can't do that if he's just declared war on you and is grabbing your grabbed clay. In closing off a source of copium, it strengthened the position of those advocating for surrendering.
We'll see it this winter the second Moscow loses power.
It had an effect on the civilian population. There were constant power outages in Odesa.
It had an enraging effect, solidifying the resolve against the invasion.
and how did that work out? are the people from odessa willing to join russia now?
No, but it was very frustrating to have to go to restaurants and invincibility points to charge electronics.
and this makes the people of Odessa want to side with the people who did this to them why?
It doesn’t??
Congrats, you're smarter than the whole combined general staff of russia.
Next step: outsmarting a goldfish
Learn to read you idiot
Good morning sir
yeap, just made people more angry towards puccia
Tit for tat strikes will burden Russian logistics far more in the rear; the ability to restore their civilian grids has the additional layer of the last properly educated generation being early Gen Xers/late Boomers, and there being to few of them to keep the infrastructure lights on as is. You can see this in their state media tours of tank production plants and the personnel. Hitting rail hubs as well will compound the effect.
Getting the plants back up is pretty trivial without simultaneously taking them all out at once.
so is this before or after the most recent shahahahahahaheed attack on the Khmelnytsky power plant
and what will they do, they'll break a couple of facades with their shitboard drones?
Just a couple of sabotage groups to blow up gas pipes in the northern forests, away from the cities, would do enough. Would take a buttload of manpower to continuously monitor all of the pipes and energy lines in regions with low population density.
why haven't they done it en masse until now?
Bad PR mostly. If the Westerners start dropping support or lose interest, I'd expect Ukraine to dig out their dirty trick handbook.
I guess that would give a reason for some Moscow and St Petersburg civilians to join the war on the Russian side as well
Also, bad international reputation to sabotage civilian energy infrastructure, like Russia is doing
i don't give a fuck, i live in cunt in ural region
How many kilometers of gas and oil pipes are there in russia? Can they protect ALL of them?
He's a known liar and he's just bluffing. Ukraine has tried many times to attack energy facilities in Russia and has not achieved any success
>Ukraine has tried many times to attack energy facilities in Russia and has not achieved any success
Every single Ukrainian attack on Russian electric infrastructure was successful
Not even close to the reality
Truth is, Ukrainian successful efforts in sabotages on Russian territory are trending upwards while Russian capabilities to disrupt Ukrainian energy system is going down.
There were no success in the attacks of the power facilities
Threatening to attack something as leverage doesn't work if you attack it anyway. We'll find out who effective the new drones are if Russia makes a move on Ukraine.
You are out of context and actual situation. They are already sending them everyday in multiple numbers
Source on them sending drones daily to attack Russia's power grid.
If that were the case, we would see ziggers spamming the "downed and intercepted inferior hohol drones" everywhere all the time. You are not even out of context and actual situation, you are out of actual reality.
Going for the energy grid isn't going to knock the ukies out of the war.
They are connected to the European power grid and they can move enough power trough the connecting lines to cover essential services.
So the russians would have to take out the ukies own production capacity and then sever those lines again and again.
You can put up a power mast and reconnect in under a day. So severing the lines isn't really an option unless you want to sling an sikander at them every other day or even every day.
So the best they could do is focus on power stations and the ukies native energy production.
Limiting the number of targets they can go for and that thus need protection.
They've also been hardening their energy grid trying to get as much redundancy as they can. And stockpiles of spare parts have been set up in Poland and Romania so the russians can't just blow them up and can replenish smaller ones in Ukraine.
How will they strike back?
I'm hoping some sneaky sneaky shit on some of russias oil and gas lifelines.
>What capabilities does Ukraine have against the Russian energy system?
Russia depends on a shitload of substations for its grid that have to be pretty nearby major cities and such just like everywhere else on the planet anon. They're plenty vulnerable to grid outages in a big ass circle from the border if Ukraine actually wanted to. There's a number of significant power plants in range too. I'm assuming Ukraine will not go after any nuclear ones for good reason, but there are coal and hydro plants that could be struck. Blowing up dams can be a warcrime not that it really matters anymore, but they don't need to blow up the dams just the high energy transformers, the reservoirs can be perfectly safe but if there's no useful transmission capacity it'll be useless from a generation perspective.
Obviously there's tons of power that is out of Ukraine's reach, this wouldn't disable all of Russia or anything. But most of Russia's stuff is concentrated in the West and they don't have the ability to transmit power everywhere. Taking out everything within range would definitely be something Russians would feel. I hope Ukraine does it.
If you get lucky, you might be able to drop a single Russian substation and watch the grid fall one after the other like the Northeast Blackout in 1965. I doubt their grid is properly maintained
>Russia will run out of energy soon!!!1
This meme is even shittier then the ammo cope. 2 more weeks and russia has to import oil from north korea
>coping and seething over truth
>quick I'll make a strawman to knock down!
good morning sirs
Drone a Russian's energy grid and he's cold for a winter.
Drone a Russian's trench and he's cold for the rest of his life.
That's cold, man
Love the implication that Russians can't fix their grid. Most likely true too.
Couldn't a bomb be rigged to detonate when it's sucked into the inlet of a hydro power station? Or the cooling water inlet of a nuclear power station. Or drone drop a mine on a coal-fired power station.
>Or the cooling water inlet of a nuclear power station
Them touching anything nuclear in Russia would be a death sentence for their public relations. UN and everyone else would be on their ass.
Not really. Attacking the reactor at Kursk NPP might draw a response (since it's just irresponsible) but dropping the power lines in and out will create the same outcome. An underrated thing about taking out electrical grids is that it tends to impact heavy industry, such as metal smelting, casting, recycling, etc far more than it does civilians.
Its a tricky situation.
You dont want to be responsible for any nuclear accidents and you dont want to be viewed in the public eye as trying to achieve nuclear accidents.
Even if it would halt the industry for some time, it would hurt Ukraines image immensely. Those that viewed Ukraine in a negative light would have a new reason to shit on them (or withold assistance) and the idea that "ukraine attacked a nuclear target in an attempt to create a nuclear explosion (or whatever)" would be constantly reminded by Russia itself as a justification for continuation of its invasion.
There have to be better ways of hurting Russia.
Would attacking transformers instead be as effective?
Well yeah, if the plant loses its connection to the power grid it'll have to shut down the reactors. The transformers leading out or the power grid outside the plant being taken out would have the same effect.
I'm bringing this up because, well fuck. Look at Kursk NPP on google maps. It's impossible to defend from commando attacks unless you have like a brigade around it minimum.
Only if you get Optimus Prime first. You get some 2nd banana like Bumblebee or Ratchet, and you've done fucked up.
Substations are the most effective/valid targets in Russia's electrical grid. Hitting certain specific ones could really make a difference; for example, a lot of Russia's trains are electric, and shutting them down would seize up parts of their economy, not to mention hampering the movement of military supplies to Rostov.
Russia deserves another Chernobyl, but on its actual home soil this time.
>Or drone drop a mine
You're overestimating drone range, unless you're talking about saboteurs rather than a frontline action
yes everything i mentioned assumed sabotage, given how leaky and sparse security is in some parts of russia.
true, i didn't think of that
Yeah, a strong begging for money to repair the damages. Lol
I don't see Russians begging for repair money yet. Lets wait and see what the damage to their energy infrastructure by sabotage will be this in winter first.
They will remove the gloves and all of Moscow will know.
Realistically probably preparing some more sabotage of oil and gas production.
It's starting already
Amazing news. And on my birthday of all days. Thanks vatnik incompetence/incontinence
Was that sabotage or a normal day in a Russian TPP?
Not that it really matters.
happy birthday, Anon!
The vatnig cope for this was funny.
>It’s a THERMOelectric power plant. It’s supposed to be on fire!
A couple winter nights without electricity would definitely help get Muscovites more involved in the war
fixed that for you
>dont do gay sex on your own countrymen in the army
>LOL IMPOTENT
kek
I mean, they already proved themselves to be able
And that is just today
I was agreeing with you, I thought your joke was good
Why wait? What a load of hot air.
Because it will be an actual danger to them if this happens in the dead of winter, rather than doing it now whilst the weather is still mild and they can at least come up with a plan to work around it by the time the real cold starts to set in.
?si=-Lj6-HtwKyPdaeWf
Drones filled with graphite dust. Can russia protect every high voltage line and every transformer?
Does mere dust suffice? Wouldn't the particles need to be of some length of a few cm at least? Has there been any such attack before? legit interested
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphite_bomb
But Ukraine doesn't care about the no-damage thing. Destroying transformers still seems better.
When youre looking for potency, there's only one man to call.
Chuck Norris?
Crimean bridge, probably
What a retarded thing to say. Either they
>a) retaliate in kind (civilian infrastructure), achieving nothing in the process except for wasting resources, losing a little bit of high ground internationally, pissing of the R*ssoid population and potentially increasing domestic R*ssian support for the war
or
>b) retaliate against solely military targets ... in which case that begs the question why they haven't done so already and in what sense this can even be considered "retaliation"
*pissing off
They have retaliated (heh) against military targets. The first uses of HIMARS standard munitions were against ammo depots and enemy command posts, the first uses of ATCAMS fired by HIMARS were against enemy airfields
The idea that Ukraine can sabotage Russian infrastructure is laughable.
>Russian infrastructure
That's german infrastructure tho, but you're right, only mutts could do it, like Hersh said.
why did mutts bomb ns1 which russia was already fucking with to get germs to open up ns2 and leave ns2 intact, conveniently for putin to immediately offer to resume transfer through it
>why did mutts bomb ns1 which russia was already fucking with to get germs to open up ns2 and leave ns2 intact, conveniently for putin to immediately offer to resume transfer through it
By pure chance one nordstream 2 pipeline was left intact, I suspect the mutts placed the mines for nordstream A and B pipe at two different places and the B pipe accidentally got two mines and A zero. Supposedly it was a mutt-britbong-norwegian cooperative effort.
both nordstreams were russian funded and russian operated. it was quite convenient for russia to destroy their own pipeline, since it couldn't be called an act of war.
It's been a year since this and vatgroids are still trying to offload the blame on someone else.
>only mutts could do it
That's disinformation
>Bong sub
>Israel US flag
Whoever made this is retarded. But honestly incompetence is expected from /misc/tards
>overanalyzing
It's a joke, you retard
Russian plumbing is indestructible since they don’t have any*~~*~~*~~*~~*~~)
More saber rattling huh? I get the point of addressing the issue but why do it like that? Just say it's nothing out of the ordinary and walk it off as nothing. Saying something like this just suggests you're going to stoop to their level or that it's working.
Why are the shills so articulate now? The snowmonkeys stopped using pajeets?
Ukraine says it has now domestic missiles with 900km range
>this is the 2nd winter of the 3-day special military operation
Russia lost already. Admiral Kirby humiliated the state department by his claiming Russia will made tactical gains just 2 days after they lost dneiper. Why vatnik sympathizers are so stupid?
In your imagination only, mindbroken zigger. Dance for us.
https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/54591601/#54591853
Lol, lmao even
I just leave this here, I got a feeling this picture will become relevant in the coming months.
weaponized beavers?
BOEBERT?
ukraine built a drone that gives you a handjob? nice
>Strike on moscow energy system actually happen.
>They did not even consider this as a possibility (!????)
>Catastrophic failure across the city
>Moscow burns
I mean, SURELY they would be prepared right? There's no way they would be so arrogant/stupid to think ukraine won't try to take revenge right?
They can't strike Russia proper because all the western systems forbid it in their contracts
>There's no way they would be so arrogant/stupid to think ukraine won't try to take revenge right?
That would seem rational, but on the other hand this is the same military that invaded Ukraine on the assumption that they would just lay down their arms and not fight back.
Why would ukraine attack russia's energy system?
They can just bomb kremlin.
Eyebrow status?
Eyebrow is in the ass,eggs have been measured and the kettle knows everything.
I couldn't keep it to myself
one more for the road
they haven't lost close to half of just the equipment they got fresh.
>what capabilities does Ukraine have against the Russian energy system?
whatever cyber attack capabilities CYBERCOM is willing give them
>the US is going to hand over 0days for a regional war
doubt that
Didn’t the new speaker of the house immediately say that aid to Ukraine and Israel is going to continue?
Eat shit, discussing military aid and weapons is 100% /k/.
New speaker said he was planning on cutting the aid packages apart so Isreali aid and Ukrainian aid would be voted separately. Where Republicans made it clear they will not pass it unless they can extract other demands. Which shows not all allies are treated equally to them. Might be because the Republican party is rank with Russian sympathizers?
No fuck you Vatnik/traitor, no party should be holding Ukraine aid hostage for political gain, if you don't see a problem with that, your patriotism is rightful questioned because you can't support the political party that's aiding Russia and claim to be against the Russians.
Fuck you Ivan/traitor we can have internal differences and a nuanced, multi-faceted approach to our opinions.
If Ukraine try's anything funny Russia can just firebomb kyiv or whatever