Quote (thesnipa @ Dec 15 2022 04:27pm)
correct, so my point was when you do it as a main strategy it doesnt signal weakness. when you dont do it for a year, then start doing it, that change in strategy signals weakness.
and it didnt work out for us as taxpayers, it worked out for Haliburton, but not us. it was incredibly costly.
Idk if I would frame it that way. To me this is Russia's way of adjusting to reality on the ground. They see Ukraine getting tons of weapons and funding from the west for an all out war so they adjusted their tactics and escalated. That's how war works, and there are many dimensions and pressure points and escalations right. I mean look at what we did to Dresden in WW2 or the nukes on Japan. I don't think framing an escalation as weakness is accurate.
If Ukrainians cities are without electricity or water, it might force more people into Europe, putting more pressure on the EU, etc. And it's not like the armed forces of Ukraine don't use water or electricity or whatever so to somehow say it doesn't impact the war is silly, it has at the very least tangential effect if not direct impact on the front lines.
This post was edited by ofthevoid on Dec 15 2022 03:37pm