I thought they were out of missiles?

 

Russia’s airstrikes, intended to show force, reveal another weakness

Oct 14th 1 AM EDT

"...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."

"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.

(Baloney. your Western Military analysts are flat out wrong. The reason they aren't hitting more high value targets is to draw this conflict out as long as they can, and only a select few know it, that's why the Russian war hawks aren't being told and wont be told whats going on. Mob bosses dont go around telling every lieutenant exactly what they are up to. Too many cooks spoils the dinner etc...)

“They are low on precision guided missiles,” said Konrad Muzyka, founder of Gdansk, Poland-based Rochan Consulting, offering his assessment of Russia’s sporadic air attacks. “That is essentially the only explanation that I have.”

(Sandbaging for the real conflict is not even a possibility there Mr. Muzyka? Really? Nobody else is even considering this?)

"The experts said the reason Russia had yet to knock out electricity and water service across the country was simple: it can’t."

"Since May, Russia’s use of precision guided missiles (PGMs) has declined sharply, with analysts suggesting then that Russian stocks of such missiles may be low.

(Opps. That was six days ago. Look at what is going on now:

Ukrainians told to 'charge everything' as power grid hit by Russia

Not one "expert", not one? is even suggesting that the Russians are sandbagging for the real conflict when it comes? Why? Not even one is suggesting as much? Why?)

“If Russia had a limitless supply of PGMs, I think that they would still strike civilian targets, because that’s what the Russian way of warfare is,” Muzyka said.

("They dont fight wars like we do.")

"He said analysts did not have confirmed information about Russian missile stocks or production levels, and judgments were based on the decline in usage of PGMs and Moscow’s greater reliance on less accurate missiles."

(Thats faulty logic, black or white thinking, it is ignoring the possibility of other options that do exist.

Another example: Russia isn't using as many precision guided missiles as it was before, therefore it's stockpiles of such weapons must be running low. That argument just flat out ignores the other possibilities that exist.)

"But a clue lies in Russia’s failure to destroy the kinds of targets that Ukraine is able to hit using U.S.-supplied HIMARS artillery. “If we take a look at what HIMARS has done to Russian supply routes, and essentially their ability to sustain war, they’ve done massive damage to Russia’s posture in this war,” Muzyka said. “So technically, you know, if the Russians had access to a large stock of PGMS, they could probably inflict a similar damage to Ukrainian armed forces, but they haven’t.”

(Again, that is a logical fallacy. The argument is being presented as either or when in fact other options do exist.

"if the Russians had access to a large stock of PGMS, they could probably inflict a similar damage to Ukrainian armed forces, but they haven’t."

Maybe because they want this conflict drug out? 

Because it benefits them and hastens the fall of the US and the West?

Thats not even a remote possibility as to why they are engaging in this conflict in the manner they are?

No "expert" ever thought of that?

I have a hard time believing that, I really do.

Remember the Fiona Hill interview piece I did a few days ago? What did she say?

"Time is not on our side."

So if you could destroy a country pretty much at will, but dragging it out benefits your side long term and hurts more serious foes abroad than the foe you are engaged with? why wouldn't you conduct the conflict in such a manner as is being waged?")

“They actually failed to,” he continued. “They even failed to interdict the main Ukrainian supply roads. They failed to destroy bridges, railway, railway intersections, and so on and so forth.”

(Yeah, they are saving it for later...duh...)

“Russia lacks the missiles to mount attacks of this sort often, as it is running out of stocks and the Ukrainians are claiming a high success rate in intercepting many of those already used,” Freedman (Lawrence Freedman, professor of war studies at King’s College London) wrote. “This is not therefore a new war-winning strategy but a sociopath’s tantrum.”

(Maybe Mr. Freedman should read the news today:

Ukrainians told to 'charge everything' as power grid hit by Russia

"President Volodymyr Zelensky said three energy facilities had been destroyed on Wednesday and energy companies were preparing for "all possible scenarios" for winter. He was due to address a summit of EU leaders, who are trying to reach an agreement on bringing down gas prices.

(Ukraine is worried about survival and the EU wants to lower gas prices...nice.)

Serious damage was reported to power facilities in Kryvyi Rih in central Ukraine and Burshtyn in the west. Ukrenergo (is an electricity transmission system operator in Ukraine and the sole operator of the country's high-voltage transmission lines.) said there had been more attacks in the past 10 days than in the whole preceding period since Russia's invasion on 24 February."

They are running low remember? 

Or are we just wishing they were? False prophets of the media etc...

Those quotes are from the article in the link above, not the article I'm currently going through :-). back to the task at hand.)

Putin’s “need to calm his critics also explains why he has lashed out against Ukrainian cities,” Freedman wrote. “The hard-liners have been demanding attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure for some time and they now have got what they wanted. But they will inevitably be disappointed with the results.”

(That I agree with. Recent attacks serve Putin's purposes, drag out the conflict, make Ukraine suffer, pleases his hardliners etc, so that makes sense.)

“These attacks could well be repeated, because it is part of the mind-set of Putin and his generals that enemies can be forced to capitulate by such means,” he added. “But stocks of Kalibr and Iskander missiles are running low.”

(Well they are being repeated...just like they said, they have started a new phase of the conflict. "But stocks of Kalibr and Iskander missiles are running low.”...Remember what the article said earlier? "Analysts did not have confirmed information about Russian missile stocks or production levels, and judgments were based on the decline in usage of PGMs and Moscow’s greater reliance on less accurate missiles." So just how does Mr. Freedman know PGM stocks are running low? They are just now starting to get started. God help us all.)

"One apparent goal of Russia’s strikes on six electrical substations in Lviv, western Ukraine, was to stop Ukraine exporting electricity to Europe, Shagina said. The strikes also crippled the city’s power supply."

(Lviv, it's practically in Poland for goodness sakes, so why didn't they hit it earlier if they could? They obviously had the capability the experts were saying they didn't have. So which argument makes more sense, "They are not hitting them because they can't." Or, "they weren't hitting them  before because the goal is to drag this on as long as possible?" Discernment yo.)

"Muzyka said Russia, ignoring international conventions, has consistently targeted civilian apartment blocks and infrastructure in two Chechen wars, in Syria and Ukraine.

(They dont fight wars by western standards, they just don't, haven't, and wont.)

“Definitely they focus on the power grid as a way of making civilian lives miserable,” he said. “For Russians, striking civilian areas, residential areas and anything that can potentially impact the lives of civilians is a military objective, because for Russia, the war is total.”

(They were all in from the get go, I listed seven of Putin's goals in the Fiona Hill piece, there will never be a negotiation, Ukraine will have a nuclear weapon detonated on its territory or The West will stand down...Again, there are no really good options are on our table.)