The unprecedented assault entered its fourth day Friday with Moscow rushing reinforcements and bombing its own territory to try to contain the Ukrainian advance.

The unprecedented assault entered its fourth day Friday with Moscow rushing reinforcements and bombing its own territory to try and contain the Ukrainian advance.

A convoy of burnt-out military trucks, some bearing the ‘Z’ symbol of the Kremlin’s war and appearing to contain bodies, sits along the side of a highway.

The video, circulating on social media Friday and geolocated by NBC News, doesn’t show a beleaguered section of the front lines in eastern Ukraine. It is a village in Kursk, across the border in southern Russia.

For days now Vladimir Putin’s forces have struggled to put down an incursion into Russian territory by Ukrainian troops, after a surprise attack that threatened to upend the war’s status quo and open a new front in a daring challenge to the Kremlin.

  • Kokesh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1104·
    1 month ago

    Well done Ukraine, well done! Let’s bring the war back to russia. Fuck putin.

    • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
      121·
      1 month ago

      The most rational 2023 summer offensive would have been a plunge into russia near volokanovka and turning hard right to enfilade their invasion, while blocking any forces attacking from the direction of moscow. It was so obvious I didn’t want to say it in case it had been missed by the defense. I can only assume a very frustrated ukraine was told they wouldn’t get their aid if they did it.

      • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
        33·
        1 month ago

        They could have done that but they wouldn’t have been able to use NATO supplied weapons. Only recently have they been lifting some of those restrictions. They could have bypassed all the Russian defenses had they done that

          • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
            22·
            1 month ago

            Yes/no. Depends how extreme you are on the issue. Russia considers an attack on Russian land with nato weapons an act of war. Another reason is we didn’t want our weapons falling into Russian hands. We want to give Ukraine weapons to defend themselves but not escalate the war. I’ve always felt if you give them weapons; let Ukraine decide how to use them best. Russia just has too many people not to take the war to them. A war of attrition only leads to a Ukrainian loss. It’s just simple math.

  • Irremarkable@fedia.io
    81·
    1 month ago

    If nothing else, having to bomb your own country to keep up a war of aggression im sure doesn’t exactly play too well at home

  • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
    56·
    1 month ago

    I’d definitely recommend watching Anders analysis if you haven’t taken a look. Seems like a risky but potentially fantastic move from Ukraine depending on what exactly their objectives are.

    Will be watching closely, looks like it’s going to be an interesting few days to see Russia scramble to get the egg off their face with this at the very least.

    • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
      21·
      1 month ago

      Is the aim to divert resources from the front lines in UA? Because that’s what this smells like.

      • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
        29·
        1 month ago

        Seems like that’s probably part of it. It could also be a response to the Russian offensives slowing down. Ukraine’s strategy so far seems to have been to stay on the defensive, preserve troops and bleed the Russian forces as much as possible as they advance. If Russia stops advancing, this strategy no longer works. Now that Ukraine has taken a seemingly significant area inside Russia itself, it means Russia is forced to keep playing an offensive role to bring this territory back under Russian control and Ukraine can continue with their strategy.

        I’m no military analyst and I’m mostly just paraphrasing what Anders said but it seems reasonable. They seem to be playing their cards pretty close to the chest right now though as to what their actual objective is.

        • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
          7·
          1 month ago

          Probably both. Divert pressure off the front. Disrupt supply lines and infrastructure (roads, bridges and railroads). I’ve also heard mention that one axis of advance is towards a nuclear plant.

          I’ve seen some keyboard warriors theorize that the Ukrainians intend to capture the plant as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Russian because Russia currently holds a Ukrainian nuclear power plant. My (wild ass) guess is that if they make it to the plant, they will just destroy its ability to generate power, then retreat.