Well, yeah . . . one does wonder why "elements" in the West either encouraged or went along with UKRO targeting Russian strategic radars, which is not really a relevant target at this point. The main reason for this seems to be a gambit on the part of the West -- realizing that the proxy war on Russia bleeding Ukraine is lost -- to escalate the conflict by "provoking" or intimidating Russia. . . i.e. to send a message to Putin to "back off" (settle the conflict on the "West's" terms) or we'll take the Ukraine conflict to even a "nuclear" exchange level . . . hoping that Putin will cooperate and settle the conflict on some kind of U.S/NATO "freeze" formula. I'd say that's a pretty big gamble (these folks are not the smartest people in the room to be sure) given that the Russkies have said "we know what you're up to," we're preparing our tactical nuclear forces, etc. Even Lavrov has concluded that the U.S. with most of the moronic Euros in tow is at war with Russia: they know who has the satellites and AWACS and who's doing the targeting, etc. The West IMO, as in Sting's song "I can't stand Losing," is going to get "STUNG" if they don't cease and desist soon.
When the Americans (and it was certainly the Americans) escalate like this and the Russians do not retaliate, the Americans then take this as "precedent" that the escalation is normal behavior.
I believe that the US is trying to demonstrate that a war can be fought with a nuclear power, even when that war crosses red lines, to show that the US has maximal freedom to smash up China, with little risk that Los Angeles is destroyed.
Effectively, the US is demonstrating that Russia (and by extension China) value human existence too much to retaliate.
It seems to me that Ukraine itself has very little to gain militarily by targeting these arrays, especially if the quantity of long range munitions it is being given is limited. Perhaps more likely is that these targets were selected by "others" (fill in the blank...) with more to gain, and not with Ukraine's interests as their top priority.
Reading over these comments, it seems you have a tough crowd today, Stephen.
You raise a key point --who decided on this target? I think the Ukrainians are trying to get Europe and the US physically in the war and they hope to do that by getting the Russians to react with something really stupid, like bombing Poland. But the bottom line is that Zelensky and Budanov and self-destructive and crazy.
In my opinion, the West is trying to create conditions for Russia's use of nuclear weapons. They want to drive anxiety levels among Moscow elites up so in case of massive attack by ATACMS or Scalp against critical infrastructure in Russia, maybe, just maybe Putin may be tempted to use a nuclear weapon. A win for NATO. PR victory.
This installation covers southern Russia from launches from the south including from Iran (and Bahrain) and Iran is not a threat. It would imply that the US 5th Fleet in Bahrain would benefit from blinding Iran to any attacks it could launch. Certainly no strategic advantage to be gained by Ukraine.
So between southeast and southwest (regardless of if either were hit or which was hit), the benefit is what needs to be weighed. Where are the possible threats to Russia's southern territory coming from? Sure isn't Ukraine. Iran lies in the path and Iran is not going to attack Russia. Looks like Iran or Russia are in the crosshairs. I think most likely Iran given the situation in the Gulf. That on top of the attack on the satellite comms complex a week ago...apparently insignificant damage sustained.
How do you think the Russians should respond if the Ukrainians keep dismantling Russia's early warning systems ?
As for the self destructiveness, much of their politicians are like that. They've been self destructing since 1991. They've could have remained neutral, keep good relations with the West and Russia and proceed to build a prosperous society.
The Russians no doubt understand Kiev's intention. They're giving us a chance to rein in the Ukrainians. If these attacks continue I don't really see what else Russia can do to get the point across.
That's a valid point. I think NATO, or at least certain elements of it, understand it very well and intentionally escalate the situation. Cross border strikes have a potential to force Russia to escalate into a limited nuclear strike.
He's not a pro. Martyanov just peddles Kremlin propaganda. If you ever see him interviewed or on Youtube, he refuses to be pinned down. If he is asked a devastating question, he moves the conversation to some other point (like a politician). Ignore everything he says.
It is difficult to imagine Ukrainians having satellite recannaissance, targeting planning and programming, necessary to use advanced precision weapons against targets inside Russia. It is US led NATO operation.
Trying to disable these is a very silly game for NATO to play.
Apart from detection these radars are also critical in assessing scale and destination of any inbound attack. Is it small scale? is it targeting purely military objects? etc
This information is used by Russian command to calibrate the response, without that information the likelihood of them jumping straight to "city killers" or launching everything is much higher.
Sounds like Ukraine is trying to force NATO to get directly involved, to suppress Russian capabilities to avert nuclear war. This is an idiotic idea but might sound plausible to desperate people.
I wouldn't assume it's not NATO's idea. They are most likely involved from the beginning, providing not only the weapons but also intelligenc, programming the target and live guidance.
However, the US could have made a deal with the Russians and kept the INF treaty going, but never tried to do that. So it is more of a theory than anything else.
The only person risking nuclear conflict is Putin. Even if UKR was unambiguously successful in reclaiming all territory seized by Russia since 2014, that does not represent an existential threat to the Russian nation.
It may represent such a threat to Putin's continued tenure, but that does not likely represent a 'threshold' event for elements within the Russian military who would actually have to execute any nuclear strike.
It’s easy to understand, the ad hominem attack and the immediate foray into unreasonable hypotheticals indicates you may not have any idea about what you speak of, or perhaps the folks in St Petersburg aren’t as good as their predecessors in Leningrad.
Well, yeah . . . one does wonder why "elements" in the West either encouraged or went along with UKRO targeting Russian strategic radars, which is not really a relevant target at this point. The main reason for this seems to be a gambit on the part of the West -- realizing that the proxy war on Russia bleeding Ukraine is lost -- to escalate the conflict by "provoking" or intimidating Russia. . . i.e. to send a message to Putin to "back off" (settle the conflict on the "West's" terms) or we'll take the Ukraine conflict to even a "nuclear" exchange level . . . hoping that Putin will cooperate and settle the conflict on some kind of U.S/NATO "freeze" formula. I'd say that's a pretty big gamble (these folks are not the smartest people in the room to be sure) given that the Russkies have said "we know what you're up to," we're preparing our tactical nuclear forces, etc. Even Lavrov has concluded that the U.S. with most of the moronic Euros in tow is at war with Russia: they know who has the satellites and AWACS and who's doing the targeting, etc. The West IMO, as in Sting's song "I can't stand Losing," is going to get "STUNG" if they don't cease and desist soon.
When the Americans (and it was certainly the Americans) escalate like this and the Russians do not retaliate, the Americans then take this as "precedent" that the escalation is normal behavior.
I believe that the US is trying to demonstrate that a war can be fought with a nuclear power, even when that war crosses red lines, to show that the US has maximal freedom to smash up China, with little risk that Los Angeles is destroyed.
Effectively, the US is demonstrating that Russia (and by extension China) value human existence too much to retaliate.
It seems to me that Ukraine itself has very little to gain militarily by targeting these arrays, especially if the quantity of long range munitions it is being given is limited. Perhaps more likely is that these targets were selected by "others" (fill in the blank...) with more to gain, and not with Ukraine's interests as their top priority.
Reading over these comments, it seems you have a tough crowd today, Stephen.
You raise a key point --who decided on this target? I think the Ukrainians are trying to get Europe and the US physically in the war and they hope to do that by getting the Russians to react with something really stupid, like bombing Poland. But the bottom line is that Zelensky and Budanov and self-destructive and crazy.
In my opinion, the West is trying to create conditions for Russia's use of nuclear weapons. They want to drive anxiety levels among Moscow elites up so in case of massive attack by ATACMS or Scalp against critical infrastructure in Russia, maybe, just maybe Putin may be tempted to use a nuclear weapon. A win for NATO. PR victory.
This installation covers southern Russia from launches from the south including from Iran (and Bahrain) and Iran is not a threat. It would imply that the US 5th Fleet in Bahrain would benefit from blinding Iran to any attacks it could launch. Certainly no strategic advantage to be gained by Ukraine.
There are two radars. We don't know which one was damaged. They have different coverages.
So between southeast and southwest (regardless of if either were hit or which was hit), the benefit is what needs to be weighed. Where are the possible threats to Russia's southern territory coming from? Sure isn't Ukraine. Iran lies in the path and Iran is not going to attack Russia. Looks like Iran or Russia are in the crosshairs. I think most likely Iran given the situation in the Gulf. That on top of the attack on the satellite comms complex a week ago...apparently insignificant damage sustained.
How do you think the Russians should respond if the Ukrainians keep dismantling Russia's early warning systems ?
As for the self destructiveness, much of their politicians are like that. They've been self destructing since 1991. They've could have remained neutral, keep good relations with the West and Russia and proceed to build a prosperous society.
I tend to agree. Almost like probing the defenses.
The purpose of the attack seems pretty clear to me. Kiev wants to provoke a Russian retaliation against the NATO logistic base in Rzeszów, Poland.
Maybe to you. The Russians have not yet reacted in any clear manner.
The Russians no doubt understand Kiev's intention. They're giving us a chance to rein in the Ukrainians. If these attacks continue I don't really see what else Russia can do to get the point across.
That's a valid point. I think NATO, or at least certain elements of it, understand it very well and intentionally escalate the situation. Cross border strikes have a potential to force Russia to escalate into a limited nuclear strike.
Poking the Russian Bear has become knifing the RB. The Ukraine/NATO/U.S. coalition seems to be provoking WWIII.
Listen to pros, like for instance Andrei Martyanov , on his channel and blog, so you understand what and why.
I read his stuff but do not agree with is general analysis. Have a nice day.
He's not a pro. Martyanov just peddles Kremlin propaganda. If you ever see him interviewed or on Youtube, he refuses to be pinned down. If he is asked a devastating question, he moves the conversation to some other point (like a politician). Ignore everything he says.
Actually I think Martyanov likes to be controversial so he gets readers.
It is difficult to imagine Ukrainians having satellite recannaissance, targeting planning and programming, necessary to use advanced precision weapons against targets inside Russia. It is US led NATO operation.
Zelensky is to Europe, and Ukraine, what Netanyahu is to the Palestinian. A mad "jusqu'au-boutiste".
Trying to disable these is a very silly game for NATO to play.
Apart from detection these radars are also critical in assessing scale and destination of any inbound attack. Is it small scale? is it targeting purely military objects? etc
This information is used by Russian command to calibrate the response, without that information the likelihood of them jumping straight to "city killers" or launching everything is much higher.
It detects nuclear capable ICBM launches and likely cruise missiles launched from the south.
Sounds like Ukraine is trying to force NATO to get directly involved, to suppress Russian capabilities to avert nuclear war. This is an idiotic idea but might sound plausible to desperate people.
I wouldn't assume it's not NATO's idea. They are most likely involved from the beginning, providing not only the weapons but also intelligenc, programming the target and live guidance.
The US used Russian "cheating" as a pretense to withdraw from the INF Treaty, but it was really about China.
That argument was made at the time by "experts"
However, the US could have made a deal with the Russians and kept the INF treaty going, but never tried to do that. So it is more of a theory than anything else.
"the US could have made a deal with the Russians"
The US doesn't make deals with the Russians, unless it's the Russian surrendering.
Thank you for this analysis sir.
Meanwhile, Russia continues to dither.
Good write up..very thorough and illuminating.
The only person risking nuclear conflict is Putin. Even if UKR was unambiguously successful in reclaiming all territory seized by Russia since 2014, that does not represent an existential threat to the Russian nation.
It may represent such a threat to Putin's continued tenure, but that does not likely represent a 'threshold' event for elements within the Russian military who would actually have to execute any nuclear strike.
It’s easy to understand, the ad hominem attack and the immediate foray into unreasonable hypotheticals indicates you may not have any idea about what you speak of, or perhaps the folks in St Petersburg aren’t as good as their predecessors in Leningrad.
Whatever kind of war it was, now it is clearly war against US missiles on Russian border. Existential war for Russia.
It is a bit difficult to understand US logic. Symmetrical Russian answer to US escalation leads directly to global nuclear war.
Asymmetrical answer that is offered to Russia by US leads to use if tactical nukes in Ukraine, that would strike several goals,
explain why US accepts de facto defeat - not to start WW3
provide unanimity among allies, unquestionable position of US as a master,
mobilize Europeans for providing soldiers for conventional war against Russia
turning Germany decisively against Russia
stop any attempt by Ukrainian citizens to question the wisdom of current US and Ukrainian strategy
Bad. Powerful. Simple. Stupid.
But Russia could produce an alternative asymmetrical answer. Surprising, intelligent, mean.