what-the-puck t1_iufq2x9 wrote on October 30, 2022 at 11:47 PM

Reply to comment by HiImTheNewGuyGuy in Russia’s Black Sea flagship damaged in Crimea drone attack, video suggests by Lahampsink

Edit: I didn't develop this talking point. I don't believe the drones took they path Russia says they did.

But that is all 100% irrelevant to my point. My point is that this is one of the smarter things Russia has done lately. No I'm not saying it's acceptable or defensible or smart, only smertER. Certainly smarter than sending a half million untrained unequipped civilians to the front lines.

I say this because they actually stand a chance of maintaining their remaining shred of reputation on a global scale (ie. not with the West), despite literally preventing ships of food from going to nearly-starving countries. Because they've tied the attacks on Sevastopol directly to the grain shipment corridor, doing so with no evidence but in what is basically an irrefutable way since nobody is going to provide evidence to the contrary of how they carried out a successful, novel attack on Russia's Black Sea navy stronghold. In the short term they'll give away grain to pretend they're not deepening famine, while it's probably Ukranian grain they've stolen anyway.

It simply isn't the stupidest thing they've done this month.

Unedited original post: They actually made a smart argument - they allege that navigationL data pulled from a downed drone indicates it was launched from a vessel in the grain corridor and navigated through the corridor before turning towards Sevastopol.

It's probably not true, but at least it's a justification for ending the grain transport agreement thing.

I am of course NOT saying I believe it's a valid justification. But at least it is A justification, when usually they don't bother or just make something nonsensical up.

Kjartanski t1_iuftr0l wrote on October 31, 2022 at 12:15 AM

And you believe that they didnt just fake up some nav logs because?

what-the-puck t1_iug6xrx wrote on October 31, 2022 at 1:58 AM

I said I didn't believe that

I said "It's probably not true"

IdesOfMarchCometh t1_iugk1ih wrote on October 31, 2022 at 3:48 AM

So you just repeat Russian propaganda lies, got it

what-the-puck t1_iugqt4u wrote on October 31, 2022 at 5:03 AM

No, the point was not that the facts are true.

The point was the facts are probably false, but they logically support Russia's actions.

In order to show they're false, what's necessary? Well, whoever carried out the first wartime surface-drone attack on a ship in the history of the planet, needs to give away information about how they actually did it. That's not going to happen obviously.

So, Russia has come up with a scenario where they can do something they desperately wanted to do - kill the grain program - while having "A justification" (to quote myself from above with all the same caveats) to do so.

Again, they usually aren't that smart.