Putin Finds Scapegoat in U.S. HIMARS, Builds Case for War With West By Katherine Fung On 8/8/22 https://www.newsweek.com/putin-finds-scapegoat-us-himars-builds-case-war-west-1731737?piano_t=1 Russian President Vladimir Putin has worked for months to build his case that the U.S. is fighting a "proxy war" in Ukraine, and now Moscow is saying the U.S.-made HIMARS rocket systems prove its point. The long-range systems, which have better precision and a faster firing rate than Ukraine's dated artillery, have boosted its efforts and limited Russia's military advances. But as Ukraine touts the success of the weapon, experts say that has inadvertently bolstered Putin's propaganda among the Russian people and given the leader a scapegoat for Russia's failures on the battlefield. Brian Taylor, a professor of Russian politics at Syracuse University, told Newsweek that Putin has used the success of HIMARS (an acronym for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems) to accuse the U.S. of being directly involved in the Ukraine war. This is part of his strategy to tap into a "deep-seated" domestic narrative that Russia is at war not just with Ukraine but with the West as well, Taylor said. Responding to comments from Ukrainian intelligence officials about the sharing of information between the U.S. and Ukraine, Russia's Ministry of Defense said last week, "All this undeniably proves that Washington, contrary to White House and Pentagon claims, is directly involved in the conflict in Ukraine." The ministry added, "It is the Biden administration that is directly responsible for all rocket attacks approved by Kyiv on residential areas and civilian infrastructure facilities in settlements of Donbas and other regions that have caused mass death of civilians." Experts say the U.S.-supplied HIMARS rocket systems have bolstered Russian President Vladimir Putin's propaganda and given him a scapegoat for Russia's failures on the battlefield in Ukraine. Above, Putin during a press conference on June 29, 2022, in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan. Getty Images The Pentagon has delivered a dozen of the rocket systems to Ukrainian forces, and an additional four are on the way. The weapon has been widely praised by top Ukrainian officials. On Monday, the mayor of the southeastern city of Melitopol said that Russia is "no longer able to resist HIMARS" in an announcement that said more than 100 Russian soldiers were killed by attacks involving the rocket systems. "Since HIMARS started working in Ukraine, in Melitopol, we've destroyed many Russian positions," he told Newsweek. Michael Kimmage, a former member of the U.S. secretary of state's policy planning staff, said that it's not "that far from the truth" to say the U.S. is directly involved in the war. Along with the sophisticated weaponry provided by the U.S., which has been credited with helping to turn the tide in the conflict, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's remark that the goal of U.S. policy is to weaken Russia by helping Ukraine could easily be ready by Moscow as "forward-leaning," Kimmage told Newsweek. He added that providing HIMARS to Ukraine not only advances the message that the war is Russia versus the West; it also helps Putin build the case that Russia was pushed into the conflict by Western powers. "That Russia was left no option and that the West uses Ukraine, as it historically has, according to Putin, to weaken Russia," Kimmage said. In a statement sent to Newsweek, a senior defense official said, "The Department of Defense is in support of a whole-of-government approach to Russian aggressive actions toward Ukraine. We continue to reaffirm our unwavering support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity." As Putin uses the effectiveness of American weaponry to justify his invasion, he has also relied on it to explain the strength of the Ukrainians' resistance. Kimmage said that the more Russia points an accusatory finger at Washington, the easier it is for Putin to excuse why his troops have not won the war as swiftly as he had anticipated. Because he has said that Ukraine is not a real country, doing poorly in its war against such an allegedly weak nation is difficult for him to defend. So positioning Russia "toe to toe with the world's preeminent superpower" gives the Russian leader a way to explain why the conflict has gone the way it has, with less embarrassment, Kimmage said. And as much as Putin wants to present the "Western boogeyman" narrative, the Russian public is ready to hear it, said Yuri Zhukov, an associate political science professor at the University of Michigan. "It is far easier to believe that things aren't going well because of U.S. meddling rather than because of Ukrainian resolve," he said. Lawrence Reardon, a professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire, said that despite Putin's messaging, complaints like those about HIMARS are proof that "Russian forces are now suffering." "The Ukrainian government and military have a highly sophisticated understanding of Russian military tactics and have demonstrated an exceptional capability of engaging the invaders," Reardon said.
I'm starting to side w/those saying Putin's looking for a way out to claim "we lost against the US" instead of 3rd world UA.
In Crimea - the first powerful explosions since the beginning of the war. The bombing of a military airfield is reported "The claps went off on Tuesday afternoon in the village of Novofedorovka in the Saki district of Crimea.
Interesting proposal this/below. I would have to see what the arguments are against it with regard to international law and all of that and with regard to unintended consequences. Seems like it would not have to be binary all or none. There are lots of different travel reason categories and seems like some of them should be cut to the bone as far as permission being granted. Probably some where not. Legitimate refugees fleeing violence should be allowed to flee for example. Russian shitbums just going to Paris or Moscow middle class kid who wants to avoid mobilization. Not so sure. I would have to see the arguments. One of the confounding problems is that many of the countries that want to keep the Russian out are not technically at war with Russia. Being at war, allows such an issue to be viewed differently under international law. On the other hand- war or no war- countries have vast authority to decide who to let in and for how long. Some countries use that power to make poor decisions - the U.S. being Exhibit A- but the point remains, countries have vast powers to make good, bad, and ugly decisions about who they let in and who they let travel there and for how long. Kyiv calls for 'ban' on Russians as Moscow steps up assault in eastern Ukraine https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...wards-izium-fighting-rages-donbas-2022-08-09/
This is a big deal. How the Russians will respond to this attack will give us an idea of what capabilities the Russians have left. On a side note, of this deep strike, one Ukrainian military official said this is only the beginning. And all of this on the heels of us releasing $1 billion more in rockets, missiles and ammunition to Ukraine. The next couple of weeks can get very intense.
Yup. The talking heads on Russian State TV will be on overdrive. An attack on Crimea is considered to be an attack on Russia- if you believe that Crimea is part of Russia and they do. Putin, has trouble with opposition to the war. But his biggest trouble is from the hardliners both in his immediate circle and amongst the people who want Putin to put the hammer down. Putin is far more likely to be ousted- if ever- by hardliners than the antiwar types. Most likely he be there for a long time, but the influence of the circle around him can change. Of course the influence of the pro-war types is greater because Putin allows and promotes it, and that is all people see on TV. But it is illegal to speak out against it. So that skews the picture of course. But they will be exploding on State TV. Crimea is (make that "was") a no-go zone. Not only is it allegedly part of Russia, it is the major staging ground for supplies to the donbass fight and for missiles to attack southern ukraine. And it is the home of Black Sea Fleet which the Russians consider to be the epicenter of their military power. Putin has loaded them to the gills with hypersonics to show his prowess in pushing back against any advance and to go tit for tat with western weapons to Ukraine. Putin will never be ousted from Kherson without calling a full mobilization first or reducing it to a parking lot so that the Ukrainians consider it to be another dead city and use their forces elsewhere.
You can’t win against a country that has nukes. The main question is whether they will or they won’t.
We’ll see what the Russians have left in the tank. They definitely talked themselves into a hardline on Crimea and the Ukrainians know damn well what they just did. On a side note, the whole eastern Ukraine is lost. It has to become a no mans land for both sides or the fighting will never stop. The Russians cannot stay and they won’t let the Ukrainians live in peace. Total loss.
I’ll take the other side of the bet. This would only aggravate Russians and counter measures will be deployed. This wont send them packing, you don’t know Russians. Shit, I don’t even understand some of their decisions and I’m more clued up on all things Russian.