Putin schleudert ballistische Rakete auf die Ukraine – jüngstes Zeichen der russischen Schwäche

Welcome to the [Peanut Gallery](https://www.nuttyspectacle.com/)! Today we’re going to talk about Russian weakness.

Please remember that I know nothing.

——————————————————————————————————

**[Ukraine:](https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-november-22-2024)**

——————————————————————————————————

Tremble, mortals! Tremble in fear! Putin has spoken!

>Russian President Vladimir Putin intensified his reflexive control campaign aimed at Ukraine and its Western partners by conducting an ostentatious ballistic missile strike against Ukraine that used multiple reentry vehicles on November 21.

It’s not actually all that scary, is it? The threat is there, most definitely, but to see it splayed out so blatantly…well, it’s kind of like seeing the monster in a horror movie. It’s never as threatening as when it was pure, nebulous potential.

So Putin threw a rock. I don’t think this tells us anything new. Everyone knew Russia had ICBMS—I’m sorry, “IRBMS”, the legally distinct knock-off version—and so using one of these missiles is kind of like…and? How is this different from the literally thousands of cruise missiles and drones the Kremlin already threw at Ukraine? The delivery mechanism? Neat, are you fucking North Korea? Is this a new capability? Is this shit supposed to surprise?

Nuts and bolts: Russia shot this fancy missile at a Ukrainian factory in Dnipro City which makes cruise missiles. They also shot 7 KH-101 cruise missiles. Ukraine shot down 6 of the cruise missiles and ignored the 7th because it wasn’t a threat. Damage to the factory from the IRBM (and the 7th missile) is described as insignificant.

Yeah, you read that right. The big, fancy missile did very little damage. That’s because its real threat isn’t in its ballistic capabilities, rather we’re all scared of its nuclear capabilities.

>Putin explicitly threatened that Russia may attack Western countries that support Ukrainian deep strikes in Russia and rhetorically connected the November 21 ballistic missile strike to Russian nuclear capabilities — a marked intensification of an existing Russian information operation that aims to use explicit threats and nuclear saber-rattling to discourage continued Western military support for Ukraine.

Do it, bitch. See what happens.

Folks, if I were in charge, America would be testing the Russian border with Finland. But we don’t live in my jingoistic utopia, so we still need to deal with folks scared of nuclear fire. Namely Europe.

Now I’m not European (just Norwegian) so I don’t know how those fellas think, but I have my doubts Putin’s IRBMs scare them overly much. That’s who he’s trying to terrify with these attacks: Europeans. They’re the target of this little information operation. That experimental missile he used, of which he only has 10 (according to GUR), wouldn’t be used against the United States. It’s out of range. This thing is meant to strike European cities: London; Paris; and Berlin. Unlike the United States, which spent the 70 years working on counter ICBM technology, Europe doesn’t have a response to this missile besides nukes.

Putin knows Trump’s win likely relegates the United States to the bleachers for the next four years of the Ukraine war. His next opponent is Europe, because Europe will step in to fill our void. This missile is meant to scare them into submission.

It’s not going to work, however. I think Europe is about to recognize the true weakness of this escalation.

>Putin’s November 21 statement demonstrates that Moscow’s constant saber-rattling largely remains rhetorical.

Recall that Putin’s “escalation” arrived as a response to Ukrainians using ATACMs and Storm Shadow missiles on Russian territory. This IRBM is their response.

Does that seem weak to anyone else? Ukraine’s escalation is a massive, tactical advantage, and will have a hard time compensating. Russia’s response is to hurl a fancy missile at a Ukrainian factory. I’m just saying that there’s a bit of a discrepancy when it comes to efficacy on the battlefield. And the battlefield is really what matters at the end of the day.

So let’s be real: exactly what escalation did the Russians respond to? Was it strikes in Russia? Because Ukraine has been hitting Russian targets for months now with their drones—and that’s not even mentioning strikes on Crimea which are nominally Russian territory. So we know Russia doesn’t care about ordinance impacting Russia proper because it’s been happening for a year and a half now and they haven’t responded with nukes.

My point is that ATACMs against Russia proper isn’t unique. Ukraine’s been raw-dogging Russian targets for months now, yet Putin failed to respond in such a flashy, over the top way previously. He only responded because it’s Western weapons, specifically European weapons. It’s wildly inconsistent and difficult to take seriously. If Putin cared about explosions on Russian soil, then he would have responded to Ukrainian drones making a mockery of his air defense. He would have responded to one of the dozen refineries going up in smoke, or his factories unable to operate under constant threat of drone strike, or his planes suddenly exploding in Crimea. An IRBM now is him saying, “This far but no further.”

And it’s a testament of weakness. Russia would respond with greater force if they had the ability, but they have nowhere left to escalate. IRBMs are the best they can manage because they’re fully deployed in every other capacity. Think about it:

They aren’t strategically relevant to the conflict in Ukraine.

They don’t expand the scope of fighting.

It’s essentially a reminder to Europe and America that Putin has the ability to use nuclear weapons but also that he lacks the will. If anything, Europe should view this as permission to escalate, because the Russian military is fully deployed. There’s nowhere else for them to go.

>Russia has reportedly provided North Korea with over one million barrels of oil and an unspecified number and type of air defense systems and missiles in return for North Korea’s provision of manpower for Russia’s war effort in Ukraine.

I figured we’d might as well talk about the Russian action which kicked this all off. Bringing North Korea into the war was a huge deal. We still remember that, right? The fact that North Korea is slated to bring in 100 thousand soldiers into the Russo-Ukraine war? I feel like it gets forgotten in the daily news grind. They’re an official cobelligerent, subject to war terms once this nonsense is said and done.

So what did North Korea actually get for this risk? ISW says North Korea got oil, lots and lots and lots of oil, and that’s probably made their lives easier. Previously North Korea was limited to importing 0.5 million barrels of oil a year, and by the sounds of it in the last year they’ve managed to rake in a full million.

Woot! Twice the annual allotment of fossil fuels! North Korea is a force to be reckoned with!

Anyway, apparently air defense and missiles were also part of the deal, but I have my doubts as to the efficacy of these systems. I sincerely doubt the Russians sent the S-400 or the S-300 to North Korea as both systems are in extremely high demand. Russia even recently reneged on a deal with the Indians for 2 S-400 systems, and the Iranians had all their systems blown up by the Israelis, so it’s in high demand. It’s not the sort of thing you hand to Kim Jong Un with a kiss and a pat on the ass for luck.

We can assume oil is the primary good of exchange, not critical military hardware to the war in Ukraine. We can also assume, therefore, that there are limits. Kim Jong Un only cares about Ukraine insofar as his nation needs oil. It means there’s weakness in that partnership.

——————————————————————————————————

>Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Head off the Department of Combating Crimes Committed in Conditions of Armed Conflict, Yuri Bilousov, reported on November 1 that Russian forces have executed at least 109 Ukrainian POWs since the beginning of the full-scale invasion in February 2022 and that Russian forces have intensified the number of POW executions they commit in 2024.

[Please give Ukraine what they need to bring this war to an end.](https://u24.gov.ua/)

——————————————————————————————————

‘Q’ for the Community:

* How will Europe respond to the usage of the IRBM? Will they stand their ground against Russian aggression or yield?

——————————————————————————————————

* Join the conversation on /r/TheNuttySpectacle!