Hello /u/HarakenQQ, This community is focused on important or vital information and high-effort content. Please make sure your post follows the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=ukraine&utm_content=t5_2qqcn) Want to support Ukraine? [Here's a list of charities by subject.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities/) [DO / DON'T](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/) - [Art Friday](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday/) - [Podcasts](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ttoidc/collection_of_podcasts_about_ukraine_updated/) - [Kyiv sunrise](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*


The prep work and planning to launch all these weapons from all these different locations takes considerably longer than two days. The ships and subs had to be loaded, fueled and then relocate to their launch sites. The same goes for the land launched weapons in Belarus.


Exactly. Thanks 🤝


Would these latest launches be at the direction of the new General that Putin put in charge of the war, or does this planning also predate his appointment?


Reportedly, the [preparations started on Oct 2 and 3](https://nitter.net/wartranslated/status/1579427399040917504#m), whereas - officially - [Surovikin's appointment was on Oct 8](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/08/russia-appoints-notorious-general-sergei-surovikin-ukraine). However, it is entirely possible that Surovikin was made aware of this plan prior to official appointment - [he would have approved, if his record in the war in Syria is anything to go by](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/sergei-surovikin-the-general-armageddon-now-in-charge-of-russias-war).


Russia no longer has the ability to make ***any*** strategic targeted strikes. And HAS TO resort to area bombardment. This is kind of the more important observation I think. I mean stiff upper lip and all; this is the end of the beginning, and all of that chap.


.. and then fired into civilian infrastructure, even random roads and such. Such accuracy! The telling part is how presumably with great planning and massive expense they fored into these targets that don’t help them win. They jist murder a few people, and cause more rage. They know already hitting these targets won’t help them but they do it anyway. If they at least hit military targets they could claim they were at least trying. Just monsters. Sad little failing monsters.


Any thoughts on what will come of the NATO emergency meeting tomorrow?


Don't hold your breath. For any real seriouse action russia has a veto.


russia has no vote in any NATO event


Sorry was thinking the un debate. But still dont hold your breath, with NATO it will be more aid, additional rapid reaction deployment as increased defence, and of course our nuclear is defensive only, MAD applies and we are watching you. Also the annual deterent exercise is about to start. That means every body has to be bloody careful.


I couldn’t agree more with OP, although my agreement has no bearing on anything, really. These attacks were planned well in advance of the bridge being blown up. Seeing the poor logistics from the Russian terrorists thus far, its unbelievable to consider that these attacks were formulated as a response to the bridge attack when the Russian terrirists have shown zero evidence of being able to mount a responsive attack like the one we witnessed. Further, as OP suggests, thinking this was a response to the bridge plays right into typical Russian terrorist propaganda by giving the false appearance of having their terroristic plans together enough to even attempt such a responsive attack. Consider the actual reality here: It took these Russian assholes *months* to plan the attack of these particular stationary, civilian targets. *Months* and its not as if they haven’t had plenty of practice attacking Ukrainian civilians. In fact, this is all Russians have had any success at, attacking non-combatitive civilians which by definition is terrorism. As pissed off as this makes me, it has had the side benefit of now encouraging politicians in my country to consider officially labellumg Russia as a state sponser of terror and even if they don’t do that, have now ensured that we will now be sending incredibly advanced anti-missile systems. Its just heartbreaking to have this support come at the cost of Ukrainian blood.


Meanwhile - **"Russian forces cannot supply mobilized forces, likely due to years of supply theft by contract soldiers and commanders. "** \- per ISW


This is the crux of it. A society of thieves. This is why the war started, because on their border civilisation was growing and making them afraid. Afraid at some point stealing might work less well, or even be punished. And the society of theft and corruption leashes out, to destroy anything that's better than itself. Mindlessly, with irrational rage.


Thanks for your message. I doubt that russia will be recognized as a terrorist state, because right now it might do more harm to the world than to russia itself. But I really want that in the future. And most importantly - more weapons to Ukraine, more air defense and finally ATACMS.


The missile attacks on Ukraine are proof that russia has exhausted all military options to conquer Ukraine. It can only hope to use missiles to terrorise and decimate a population that will surrender. Which is not going to happen. Sadly, this is the last and very painful phase of the war, the most painful for the civilian population. When russia fires its limited supply of missiles, there will be a phase of gradual liberation of ukraine without russian resistance. Cleansing Ukraine of the russians. With every missile that lands on Ukraine, the willingness to help grows. This, of course, will not bring back all those lost lives. The good news is that russia is aware of its defeat and is just doing last desperate acts like H|tler did when he bombed the UK with V missiles at the end of the war. Those didn't turn the tide of the war either. Russia was defeated by its own propaganda, which they believed and will believe to the very bitter end.


This whole reasoning makes Russia even look more incompetent. Waging an attack that does bring no military advantage can be kind of explained as an angry reaction on a hard strike of Russia's logisitics. Yet if this attack was the result of weeks of planning in advance the result is outright pathetic.


This strike is for internal consumption, radical putinists were demanding strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure to make Ukrainians starve and freeze to death. Putin does it to avoid losing face, most likely.


The fun thing is if these attacks were concentrated on one city they might have accomplished a result that came somewhat close to that, at least for that city. And thus Putin's regime might have gotten some stories it could have exploited for its domestic audience.


For everyone who can and wants to help Ukraine bring victory closer - State site where you can donate directly to Ukraine https://u24.gov.ua


Done. Slava Ukraina


Thank you. Героям Слава!


Yeah if you follow Julia Davis, who translated ru state tv https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews They have been talking about and priming their population for weeks now about hitting critical infrastructure


I think the renewed use of long range missiles on civilians and infrastructure has more to do with the new general put in charge of the invaders. Gen. Surovikin is known for his brutality in Syria .[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/sergei-surovikin-the-general-armageddon-now-in-charge-of-russias-war](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/sergei-surovikin-the-general-armageddon-now-in-charge-of-russias-war)


This makes the most sense. It’s a shift in war-making strategy by the new general.


Which would be an immdiate proof of his military inability. And propably a failure to understand how different these two warzones are.


Someone needs to make a meme or cartoon showing Putin asking his advisors about what's the next thing from Hitler's war script, and the answer is the blitz and he gives it the green light.


Wasn't the blitz the ["3 day special military operation"](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMtlR-fX0AwY-84?format=jpg&name=orig)?


At least in English, when we hear blitzkrieg we think of Germany's rapid military success at the beginning of the war, but the shortened form 'blitz' was Germany indiscriminately bombing England, mostly London, either with bomber aircraft or with V1/V2 rockets.


Didn't know there was a difference. But yes, my native language is German, so I'm bound to read the literal meaning. Blitz = Lightning = ~~Fast~~ **Special** Military Operation


The Kerch bridge strike was to solicit a knee jerk reaction from Russia. Baiting them to waste resources. Baiting them to fire more artillery than is sustainable. Entangling them further in their endless spiral of bad decision making. It's like watching a badly beaten boxer throw everything he has in one last ineffectual flurry before being knocked out.


More importantly it is part of plan to castrate russian logistics. The Kirch bridge is not just used by russians to go on holiday. With no trains moving they can't send weapons and fuel to support southern front. Also the vehicle traffic is crippled since they can not send heavy equipment and trucks over the surviving path. There are other bonus psychological effects.


Of course it is also of strategic value but the day after Putin's birthday was planned with malice aforethought. They have a plan B, C, D-Z for hitting that bridge and Putin knows this. He just can't do shit about it strategically.


Looking forward to the day when the UAF detonates the entire length.


Or it was false flag attack. We. Bridge got more damage than they initially thought and they didn't count with train getting hit either. Plan was to damage one roadway only so it would be easy to repair. But they overestimated bridge quality. Now to blame it on Ukraine and have "reason" to start shelling again sounds more and more plausible.


I believe you are wrong, maybe not entirely, but still. All experts agree that these types of attacks has none/limited effect on the actual war progress, it serves almost entirely as a fear generator (AKA acts of terror) and even this I would say is not happening, if anything it is unifying the Ukrainians further. Thsese attacks are simply a move from Putin/co to make it look like they are accomplishing something in the absence of actual progress. (and yes, as a response to the bridge attack, ofc)


> (and yes, as a response to the bridge attack, ofc) ukrainian intel claims the big missile attack was planned at the start of october. the point is russians have tried to frame it "look what happens when you do something mean, we will do something extra mean to make ukranian civilians suffer", but they already had the big attack on civilians planned


> these types of attacks has none/limited effect on the actual war progress I agree with this. If you look at the amount of missiles that hit their targets and the amount of damage caused to military infrastructure it's none at all. This doesn't change the course of russias defeat. This was terror, pure and simple.


[RF planned massive airstrikes even before explosion on Crimean Bridge – the White House](https://ukranews.com/en/news/887266-rf-planned-massive-airstrikes-even-before-explosion-on-crimean-bridge-the-white-house)


I m quite not sure about "all expert agree". This bridge has an important role as a logistic passage for military : fuel, food, weapon. It s a good supply line of the front, far away from the front.


Yeah, thats not what im saying though, im saying the ruzzian attacks on civilian infrastructure har limited effect on the war progress, obviously the bridge is a major blow to the ruzzian military effort.


OK sorry i misunderstood you ;) so we agree :=)


I agree with you that russia seeks a reason to justify their attacks on civilians in Ukraine, but why would they destroy their own bridge that costs so much money?


I don't think OP means they did the bridge themselves. I read at one point that Putin (allegedly) said to Abramovich (trying to talk Putin out of his madness) that he should tell the Ukrainians that he (Putin) will "raze them to the ground". He just wants his USSR back. And we know how Stalin handled disobedience. Putin would never bomb his ego-boosting-bridge. Much less on his 70th birthday. I can see what OP is saying being true. He just wanted to have his little birthday party so activities on the battlefield were less pronounced let's say. Then after his birthday the plan would've always been to once again "bomb those dirty Ukrainians all over". Him hitting civilian targets isn't anything new anyways.


I did not say that they did it themselves, although it is possible. I am saying that an attack of this scale was planned long before the bridge. It is impossible to plan and prepare such an attack in two days.


Sorry just a misunderstanding. I do agree with you.


putin: NATO destroyed our beautiful Bridge. Sorry, it is now almost impossible to supply troops, equipment, ammunition to our troops in Southern Ukraine. We will fight to the last brave russian soldier against the overwhelming combined NAZI forces of Ukraine, NATO, EU & USA, and their puppet states. Even if we do not achieve total conquering of the NAZI State we will have completely reduced their ability to be a threat to Mother ruZZia and the ruZZian aligned autonomous republics. Good night!


It is clear to me that the Russians anticipated that something would happen at Putins birthday. It still could be a reaction. But they would have done it eventually no matter what.