A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
at least 30 civilians were killed
a bombardment that lasted around 18 hours.
This is outrageous, why are we (the west) letting Russia get away with this? Everybody that helps Russia in their illegal and immoral invasion must be punished. We need to do more.
Wait until you hear what the West is allowing Israel to get away with.
Yes that's outrageous too, but it's not a European security problem the same way Russia is. That said, I am so sick of our politicians defending and even supporting Israel.
Israel has proven that they're willing to invade lands that they do not own under the guise of divine birthright. They are slaughtering innocent children. They are executing innocent civilians. They're openly executing the hostages they supposedly want to save. They are insanely well funded, have an espionage agency that is world renowned and (again) have proven that they are willing to commit war crimes to exterminate a group of people they do not like.
I'm sorry my guy but that seems like a pretty big security problem brewing given that they're using the fucking Nazi playbook.
Yes it's a security problem, but not remotely close to the security problem Russia poses to Europe.
The middle east is mostly a security problem for Europe in the form of refugees.
How antisemitic of you.
If Russia did not have nuclear capabilities we would have invaded Russia about a week after they invaded Ukraine and by now we would be well into the war crimes trial of putin.
The west can't get pulled into direct conflict with putin because we would win. Handedly. And putin would inevitably deploy his nukes as his situation became more desperate. We would have to respond in kind and that's the ballgame.
That is true, but we could still do more than we do. The west has been holding off on military aid to Ukraine, we have held back on F16 and long range missiles. That would help Ukraine tremendously against the attacks from Russia.
Also just my own country, there are 2 very well known companies that are still doing business in Russia. Only recently bans were made against Russian kaviar and diamonds. Why do we not have a total trade blockade. We could also do more to pressure Iran, China and India to not help Russia.
All democracies need to stand together when a democracy is attacked by a totalitarian regime, despite Ukraine and the west did a lot to appease Russia.
Add to that constant threats by Russia, to attack Europe with nukes, and invade EU (Baltics) when they are done with Ukraine. They probably also plan to take Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.
We absolutely 100% need to take this way more seriously.
The US has a far-right Nazi aligned problem party called the Republicans that keep it from properly helping Ukraine.
Still even when there was a clear majority for aid, the aid was held back on important tactical equipment.
But unfortunately the Republicans are traitors who support the obvious traitor Trump and his policies of supporting Russia, despite it's so very clearly against American interests.
So called "moderate" republicans like Mitt Romney, still support the policies that prevent aid to Ukraine, and thereby help Russia. So basically all republicans are traitors against USA and very much traitors against democracy in general. Which has always been a key value for USA since their independence.
It's vary hard seeing that here from Europe, that USA support for democracy is declining like it is.
it has nothing to do with nukes, it's all about money.. there are wealthy people in the US and Germany and other places who don't want Russia to lose..
Nah see you've got it wrong. You are correct that things happen or don't happen based entirely on the wealth that is generated for select people. But the people who would benefit from the domination and removal of Russia easily outbid the people who would benefit from their success. The major companies that are already making insane money sending weapons to Ukraine would be happy to see a ground war kick off into Russia. Yeah there's some right wing grifters that are pro Russia but they're small potatoes. The money Russia is throwing around is a fraction of a percent of the money that nato aligned arms manufacturers and whatnot are throwing around.
tiny amounts like you are talking about are important in a failing economy like Russia, but not elsewhere.. i'm talking about real money..
Those are rookie numbers for civilian casualties. Gotta pump those numbers up.
Sincerely, Israel
True, there ought to be Western intervention, but instead we are helping Israel. But as bad as that is, it is not a security problem for Europe in nearly the same way Russia is.
I have no solution to the Israel/Gaza problem, and I am not sure we are supporting the right side.
There is no right side anymore. israel had the moral backing at first, then they became even worse than hamas.
Israel were always as bad or worse than Hamas, and Israel are the ones with the power to change things for the better. The Palestinians live like in an occupied territory, where they are oppressed and discriminated against in their own territory.
We cannot say Palestinians are the bad guys, when thy never had a chance to build a normal life.
Yeah, especially for $1+ Billion, not a really good return on investment, that’s like $30+ million a person, they really need to streamline their civilian liquidation procedures. They should really consider getting American-made weapons for operations like that.
All lives are priceless but.. if you take a heartless financial look at this, $1.2 billion dollars for the lives of 30 civilians and a few civilian buildings is a horrible return on investment.
Just because they're the good guys doesn't mean they never do propaganda. They probably under-report military damage, as this might inform the enemy of their weaknesses. On the other hand, they talk a lot about civilian casualties, as this allows them to attract the world's sympathy.
It's still a wonder. 174 people dead or injured, if even underreported, means less than two hurt by one missile that alone can level a multi-level apartment complex. That means their air defence, even with that unprecendented intensity, knows their shit and downs most incoming missiles in the open field before it's too late. The only problem is if they have enough munition to keep that going. That's on EU, US and others to provide. There can't be a 100% success rate, but if they didn't do their job at all, there could be thousands of victims like in Gaza that doesn't have any defences at all. None of these victims should have experience that, but for comparing no defence and an active work in that direction, you can see not only lives saved, but effective, deserved investments other countries are slow to provide. If not in attacking ammunition for some reason, but in defensive one, those get exhausted in these major attacks like a popcorn and need the according temp of replacement. Letting them defend their people and critical infrastructure is a universally a good thing. And they've shown they can work with it alright.
How costly is the air defence in comparison to the cost of the attack?
It really depends. I’m on the go so I can’t dig deep, but news reports keep saying Russians used cruise missiles.
A Russian Kh-101 costs about $18 million USD. A Kalibr is somewhere between $1 and $6.5 million USD (sources are a bit muddy and I think the high end is more like the export price).
There is a wide variety of air defense systems from many countries in Ukraine, but for example a single Patriot missile, a long range defense for shooting down cruise missiles costs about $4 million USD for the US. The cost of the launcher is about $1 billion (with a b) for the US. In this case you can see the missile is, relatively speaking, cheap compared to the whole system.
Keep in mind there is a ton of variation. Russia allegedly also launched drones, and a drone is a pretty wide category of size and price.
Patriots are expensive, an IRIS-T costs about 350k Euro, SL variant 500k (the air defence system can use both using quite cheap launchers but the base variant has quite limited range when launched from the ground, being an air-to-air missile and all). And they have yet to miss an incoming missile.
The ideal situation is if they can take something down with a Gepard, a burst should cost maybe 100-200 Euro and you usually only need one or two, they're quite accurate.
No expert, but I remember that systems to defend themselves are wery expensive, since they have many elements to cover a perimeter, but the rockets themselves are not as much as those targeting you. If they can keep new systems safe and just consume shots, it seems cost effective to those rockets trying to breach the dome. I'd like for some weapon geek to correct me.
I think you’ve got the basic shape of it for long range air defense, although a Russian Kalibr missile can be cheap when talking about guided missile prices, so there are exceptions. I think, on average, a cruise missile will be more expensive than a defensive missile.
More than focusing on the dollar amount, looking at the capability loss intrigues me more. Cruise missiles are offensive, and take longer than dumb weapons to build, especially for Russia due to shortages of tech resources. Wasting them on essentially a giant terror attack with no follow through is just burning resources. Where were these missiles when Russia was sending infantry waves into Avdiivka?
On the flip side, air defense missiles are only defensive. Sure, using them to defend from this missile wave depletes future ability to use them, but they were depleted while doing exactly what they were built to do.
My understanding is that attacks like this force deployment of air defences to population centers rather than protecting military targets. So no direct military benefit, but it can help shape the battlefield.
It’s absolutely possible. I don’t have have up to the minute reports, and I don’t think anybody in the west has access to the thoughts of Russian military leadership.
My impression though is that it is a quite uneven military trade to put so many resources into an attack like this just to divert protection away from the frontlines, and then not really leverage that by hitting the lines. Maybe it’s coming later after goading Ukraine into permanently sending resources to civilian areas. I do not know.
I have suspicions on what else it may be, but it is mere wild speculation.
Good. Let them bankrupt themselves into irrelevance.
Dude 30 people died.
Let their bombs explode in the launcher.
If they keep getting munitions from North Korea then that’s sure to happen!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Russian President Vladimir Putin's military on Friday launched what's been called the largest aerial attack of the Ukraine war, and one economic-focused Ukrainian outlet estimated the cost of the assault for Russia to be at least $1.273 billion.
The figure was calculated by Ekonomichna Pravda (Economic Truth), which tallied the prices of the drones and missiles the Ukrainian Air Force reported Russia used during the massive assault.
In its assessment of the attack, the ISW said the mix of weapons came as a result of "several months of Russian experimentation with various drone and missile combinations and efforts to test Ukrainian air defenses."
The ISW reported in October that Russian forces were diversifying its mix of aerial weapons to identify potential weaknesses in Ukraine's air defenses.
On Friday, the ISW wrote that "Russia was likely deliberately stockpiling missiles of various sizes through the fall and early winter of 2023 in order to build a more diverse strike package and apply lessons learned over the course of various recent reconnaissance and probing missions."
The reason for large strikes such as the one conducted on Friday, according to the ISW, is Putin's forces are attempting "to degrade Ukrainian morale and Ukraine's ability to sustain its war effort against Russia."
The original article contains 468 words, the summary contains 207 words. Saved 56%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
The extreme category of Stupid Human Tricks.