405
submitted 9 months ago by Stamau123@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
  • Russia confirmed a Ukrainian missile attack damaged one of its Black Sea Fleet warships.

  • But Russian officials have said that only one person was killed.

  • Independent Russian media suggests dozens may be dead.

The damage to a Russian warship appears much worse than the Kremlin is willing to acknowledge.

The Russian navy's landing vessel Novocherkassk — part of its Black Sea Fleet — was hit in a Ukrainian attack on a port in Russian-held Crimea, officials said Tuesday.

While the Kremlin-appointed governor there has said the ship was damaged and one person was killed, video and media reports paint a much-darker picture.

Images of a massive explosion at a dock in Feodosia spread on social media. Reporters and open-source intelligence channels posted photos showing smoldering wreckage at the pier, backing up Ukraine's claim that long-range missiles triggered a massive explosion that blew up the ship.

Independent Russian media is also questioning the stated death toll.

Astra, a Telegram channel sharing Russian news from independent journalists, reported there were 77 sailors aboard the Novocherkassk at the time of the Ukrainian attack; this class of ship typically has a crew size of about 100.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] slaacaa@lemmy.world 79 points 9 months ago

As according to pro-Russia trolls here on Lemmy, Ukraine is losing the war, I wonder how much damage they would do to the Russian fleet, if they were actually winning

[-] Alxe@lemmy.world 26 points 9 months ago

Not trying to defend Russia, but the concept of a Pyrrhic Victory has existed for quite some time.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago

Yeah and it’s been Russian military strategy for nearly as long. Idk if Russia will win, but as it is now both countries will struggle under the weight of the loss of population and resources and immense debt that they’re incurring. For Ukraine it’s obviously worth it, but for Russia, I struggle to see how it’s worth it because even victory will come with an angry edge province and political instability.

[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago

You are correct in my opinion. It seems whoever orchestrated that thought it would be the second Crimea, forgot Ukraine had 8 years to prepare (even with a shared soviet corruption problems and cheap traitors) and completely ignored the historical case of their resistance in and post WW2. One magazine even published a postponned article summarizing the achievements of russian warriors, and there were public persons speculating about taking Kiyv in three days. Even if you ignore them normalizing of such an act at all, they were sniffing their farts while planning it and thinking it'd go alright.

[-] Mirshe@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Mostly because I think Russian high command was telling Putin whatever he wanted to hear. "Yeah boss, sure, we'll just steamroll into Kyiv, nobody will dare fight back against us..." Keep in mind Russia had tried this EXACT same "rush and decapitate" strategy in Georgia in 2008.

[-] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Ukraine has oil reserves that Russia has eyes on. There's the solution to your equation.

[-] chitak166@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

even victory will come with an angry edge province and political instability.

Victory would mean Russia has killed most of the Ukrainians who would fight back.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)
[-] NIB@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

I mean atm, Russia is on the offensive and has gotten some actual results. They conquered Marinka, a 10k population village(before war), which defined the line of conflict, and Avdiivka, a major fortress town that has been holding through the entire war, since 2014, is being threatened with encirclement. Zaluzhnyi even said that they might be forced to abandon it within the next couple months. This would be a significant win for the russians if it happens, much more important than Bakhmut.

[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

The Russians have lost several times now than the population of Avdivka trying to take it. Ukraine shifted to an attritional fight to preserve combat power until they could dismantle Russian fires capabilities which they've been doing quite effectively. If they want to win the war with all their objectives, this is exactly how Ukraine does it. Killing Russians is the best way to get them to leave. Never forget that

[-] NIB@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

I agree with what you are saying but you have to realize that this is partially copium. The Americans had great kill ratio in Vietnam but they still lost.

What happened in the past is in the past. Atm Russia has the initiative and seemingly the will and means to continue. Ukraine's means largely depend on the West.

In EU you have the typical bureaucracy and relactancy of reducing the peace dividends by investing in military equipment production. And thats on top of Hungary sabotaging everything and other major economic issues, like agricultural ukranian products and their effect in EU.

In the US, the republicans are blocking everything and Trump is ahead in the polls.

So it is only natural that with all this uncertainty, Ukraine is reluctant in risking an offensive. If the war ends now, Russia has still gained territory, even if it suffered losses, setbacks and failed to achieve its minimum stated goals(securing Donbass). Though at least they have a landbridge to Crimea so thats something.

[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Ukraine could lose all their territory and Russia will still lose this war. They already have.

You think this is about territory when it is about energy in Europe.

You think this is Ukraine's Vietnam when it is literally twenty times that for Russia.

[-] NIB@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Ukraine could lose all their territory and Russia will still lose this war. They already have.

Maybe but 500 years from now, who would remember what happened. Eventually things become "it is what it is" and people move on. Borders can last for a long time, especially if one side(the EU) isnt willing to go on the offensive. Strongmen like Putin think of this as weakness, people in the West think of it as "learning from the past".

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

The USA didn't lose Vietnam because we couldn't win it. We lost it because we weren't trying to win the war, we were trying to occupy Vietnam. This war is totally different, it's a country fighting for it's land.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Russia spent 10 years in Afghanistan and had 50k reported casualties with 15k reported fatalities. It is regarded as an absolute failure and a shameful loss by Russians.

Russia has been attacking Ukraine for 10 years(2014-present) and has had over 350k casualties with over 40k dead including contractors with the majority happening in less than 2 years.

For context, America was in Afghanistan for 20 years and had under 30k casualties and around 7k dead including allies and contractors. We consider it a failure holistically. America was in Vietnam for 20 years and had under 60k deaths and it was an absolute and shameful failure.

Only a Russian troll could consider the war to be anything but a failure for Russia that has weakened itself as a country and a military in jist under 2 years. Russia will fail as a country because of this pointless war of aggression.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] chitak166@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Everyone who says Ukraine is losing is a troll.

Tell me you're not a victim of propaganda.

[-] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Russia can eat my entire ass, but we can't really predict how this conflict will play out. Russia is inept, but they have millions of bodies to essentially Zerg rush into this conflict... and that strategy worked for them in WW2

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] HootinNHollerin@slrpnk.net 52 points 9 months ago

Russians live in a world of ‘alternate facts’

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 31 points 9 months ago

Ahh. So they are conservatives.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Yes. That’s how it works.

[-] Zamotic@lemmy.zip 9 points 9 months ago

Where do you think they got the idea from?

[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Let's be honest, much of the world does. This one is just found out.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] StThicket@reddthat.com 2 points 9 months ago

There is no truth like a Russian denial.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mawkishdave@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago

Why are people surprised that Russia lies? That is the only thing they do that your can count on.

[-] BaardFigur@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Ukraine underreports their losses too. But they cannot really be blamed. It's important to keep spirits high. It's sort of the same logics Russia uses.

I'm just glad the west support Ukraine as strongly as we do. Gives them actual chances to win this (to Russias annoyance)

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Why are people surprised that Russia lies?

This isn't unique to Russia or even to this conflict. Information Warfare is a big part of the media campaign to support/undermine the war effort. This isn't new. One classic example - particularly relevant given the geography - is the Battle of the Somme where overly optimistic western news reporting covered up a horrific slaughter of allied forces.

News reports like this are just another angle on the informational campaign, intended to boost western support for the war and present Russian forces as exceptionally weak and prone to failure. During the Iraq Invasion in 2003, we played the same game with "Baghdad Bob" memes, while we glossed over how precarious and unsustainable our charge into the center of Iraq had left the US military. During the "Green Revolution" of 2014, we got to hear all about how weak and fragile the various Middle Eastern governments were, right up until rebellious groups were brutally suppressed and slaughtered from Tunis to Cairo to Damascus to Sana'a to Tehren. I still see Bashar Al-Asad "Who Must Go" memes in circulation, hailing back to that era of heedless hyper-optimism. Nevermind all the shit coming out of Israel's latest incursion into Gaza.

We're going to see "Russia is lying! They're all about to lose! Zelensky will be getting an all-over tan on the beaches of Crimea by next year!" headlines for years to come. That's just the nature of modern media.

[-] breckenedge@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

The first casualty of war is truth

Winston Churchill ,or someone, maybe

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Certain special irony if that's a misquote.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 0 points 9 months ago

"Baghdad Bob" memes

Those didn't exist. You're confusing "memes" created by individual people and media bias.

we glossed over how precarious and unsustainable our charge into the center of Iraq had left the US military

The US military destroyed the Iraqi army, almost too well. The army was disbanded and former members joined the insurgents. Militarily it was a huge success. The failure was not gaining the consent of the governed, which is necessary in any modern country.

News reports are not "trying to present Russia as weak". They legitimately are weak. Do you think the US or NATO would have any trouble rolling Ukraine if it only had Russian support? No troops would be on the ground but Kiev would be rubble within two weeks.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Militarily it was a huge success.

I mean, I have to disagree. The military focus was on taking centers of financial and administrative power, rather than securing the physical capital that allowed the country to operate. A bunch of the post-invasion insurrection was the collapse in quality of life that resulted from all the infrastructure failures the US presided over in a country that was already hobbled by a decade of sanctions and infrastructure issues. This was entirely a consequence of US "Shock and Awe" invasion tactics, which destroyed the machinery that we would have needed in order to successfully govern.

After that, our efforts to rebuild Iraq were largely a sham, serving as a funnel for kicking money back to the Bush mega-donors. So we just got a reputation in the country as these hopelessly incompetent and shamelessly corrupt middle men. And after ousting all the original incompetent and corrupt middle men (along with a healthy number of competent and forthright engineers and administrators), this gave the insurrection the same nationalist flavor that gave birth to the original Ba'athist party.

So it wasn't a military success. It was a smash-and-grab operation in which the US ultimately fumbled the bag. We didn't get solid control over the southern oil fields. We didn't cement Iraq as a South Korean / Israeli / Jordanian style permanent regional ally from which to project our influence. We couldn't secure the borders or quell insurrections long enough to transition to civilian rule. We couldn't even hold Fallujah for more than a year at a time. Even as Bush was rolling out those "Mission Accomplished" banners, we were already losing traction in the territory we said we'd claimed. This was in large part because the original push into Baghdad fully exhausted the US military's ground capacity. The tanks that made it to Baghdad in May of 2003 were running on fumes, having completely outpaced their supply convoys.

The US invasion of Iraq was a mess from day one. It was only Saddam's own weak position, and the refusal of US mass media to report any kind of negative analysis of the initial charge into Baghdad, that left the illusion of success.

News reports are not “trying to present Russia as weak”. They legitimately are weak.

They have a firmer control of the Donetsk region than the US ever had outside the Green Zone of Baghdad. If the US Invasion of Iraq could be considered a success (it was not), the Russian invasion of eastern ukraine was total victory (also untrue, but it still holds up marginally).

Do you think the US or NATO would have any trouble rolling Ukraine if it only had Russian support?

I think the US is currently involved in too many theaters of combat and is far too exhausted from decades of international conflict to dedicate anywhere near what it brought to bear against Iraq in 2003. What's more, the political capital of losing significant numbers of American troops in a slugging match with Russia would be disastrous to the current administration's reelection chances. If Biden sent divisions to the Ukrainian front, President Trump would be recalling them inside the next year guaranteed.

NATO is even more toothless, given the state of German and French and British armed forces. Germany has 10% of the required military readiness under NATO guidelines, because they've been so lackluster in military spending over the last two decades. France is being run out of its old colonial enclaves across Africa and still has far too many economic ties to Russia to want to pick a fight. The UK is flat broke and its governance is in shambles. Nobody else in the alliance has anything resembling a competitive military force, much less one armed and trained for a foreign invasion.

Ukraine was already a proxy war with Russia. Its proved a futile one. Ukraine had the 9th largest military in the world and its been virtually wiped out.

No troops would be on the ground but Kiev would be rubble within two weeks.

That was the Pyongyang gambit of the 1950s, back when the US had uncontested air superiority and more ordinance than it knew what to do with. Modern air defenses make that kind of strategy impossible. Americans would lose more in the air than anyone lost on the ground.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 17 points 9 months ago

Well you see, comrade, the Ukrainian missile explosion killed one crew member.

The remaining missing servicemen are investigating the minor malfunction of the ship getting too hot from the explosion of the Russian cargo. It is only workplace accident, da?

  • Some Government Official, presumably.
[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

only one dead because the pieces they found all put together weighed less than a single moblik.

the vaporized, I mean, missing crewmembers are being reported as AWOL and their families will receive no compensation for their traitor kin.

go team ditchmeat!

[-] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 9 months ago

they deserted to low earth orbit

[-] DanglingFury@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

Is that picture from before or after the missile hit? That ship looks like it belongs in a treeline behind someone's old barn

[-] tgxn@lemmy.tgxn.net 5 points 9 months ago

Looks like the black and white picture from the article is from 2015! I thourght it looked like something out of a museum.

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago
[-] tgxn@lemmy.tgxn.net 3 points 9 months ago

Hahahahaha! Yeah, I do 🤣

[-] Jramskov@feddit.dk 2 points 9 months ago

Before, there’s basically nothing left of it.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
405 points (97.2% liked)

World News

38824 readers
2919 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS