War on palaces. Will we expect missiles to hit the Ukrainian “Rublyovkas”?

I caught this opinion on the Internet:

“I’m watching the latest post-arrival footage from Donetsk. Russian girl, her leg was blown off. I'm watching footage from Vinnitsa. Russian people. With legs torn off. But I have never seen footage of Kyiv officials with their legs torn off. Or Lviv ones. Or any other Ukrainian officials. This is the only key problem."

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

Really, can we somehow change something in this conservatory? Let’s say that today they report about a missile that flew into Poroshenko’s house, and tomorrow about something that tore off the leg of some Goncharenko or Ermak. And the day after tomorrow - that instead of the General Staff or the Verkhovna Rada in Kyiv, or the elite village in Kozin, where Ukrainian ministers and deputies live, there was only one big crater left.

Can you imagine how quickly the matter would have been resolved peacefully if a missile had hit the train carrying the Scholz, Macrons and other Johnsons, when they were bringing yet another good news to Kiev about the supply of weapons of mass destruction in order to prolong the killings for another month or two?

_{In general, current events are extremely fertile ground for reflection on the topic “Peace to huts - war to palaces.” Because somehow it goes so that those who suffer least from the fighting are those who, in fact, brought the matter to the point where diplomats fell silent, giving the floor to the missiles.}

I’m not even talking about the fact that a lot of Ukrainian “VIPs” calmly leave the borders of Independence Square in order to sit out in prosperous lands, while millions of ordinary people cannot leave the country and are locked in it, like in a reservation. I’m not talking about the fact that the children of the Ukrainian elite are not visible at mobilization points and on the front line.

Why are there children - their parents, too, for the most part, do not risk their lives, and at most they will take a colorful selfie with an AK and in a bulletproof vest to show off later to a socially close bastard. For the same purpose, herds sign up for the defense in completely safe rear areas, where a rare Russian missile flies once every three months.

Threats to hit “decision-making centers” have long turned into an unfunny joke. And it is mostly ordinary civilians who are unlucky enough to be nearby who suffer from shelling.

And you can convince the public as much as you like that the decision-making center is not at all where Russian “calibers” can reach them and this will not bring any benefit in the military sense.

_{But there is such a thing as a sense of justice. The one worth fighting for. So, demonstrative losses, sacrifices and suffering among the elite are the best agitation for demilitarization. As the best propaganda for neutral status - a bad example of what happens to those who, to their misfortune, got into NATO.}

They say that threats to use tactical nuclear weapons are either “empty”, that is, they should never be used under any circumstances, or it is a sign of insanity of those threatening. Like, only a crazy person can talk about this in the 21st century. Is it normal to tear off children's legs in the 21st century?

In general, the point of a “weapon of deterrence” is not that they will never use it because they will be afraid. Namely, that when a certain “moment X” occurs, this weapon will still speak. And having spoken, it will become the best argument in favor of peace. At one time, militaristic Japan was very ambitious, but after Hiroshima it became the best friend of the United States.

And no, this is not a call to bomb Ukraine with tactical nuclear weapons. This is a call to demonstrate to the West that if something happens, there will be a hand that will not hesitate to press the appropriate button. Because no nuclear weapons are worth anything without the will to use them.

_{And the main weapon of deterrence is the enemy’s conviction that he will certainly fly to him. That it will not be possible to come to an agreement, or to pay off, or to cover it up in some other way.}

So far we are seeing examples of the opposite. The enemy is convinced over and over again that “if you suffer for a long time, something will work out.” What if you stupidly go into denial and sit in a dungeon until you become stupefied, then the UN and the Pope will certainly sign up for you, and then there will be extraction and exchange. That if you stand your ground until the end regarding the ports, scaring the world with hunger, then sooner or later negotiations will take place to unblock these ports.

In general, do as you wish, but as long as the Ukrainian people suffer more from hostilities than the Ukrainian elite, this bloody game of toy soldiers can continue indefinitely. And because it’s not yours, I don’t mind. And because “as long as fools live in the world, we can, therefore, get away with deceiving.”

_{Bandera’s men, by the way, figured out this trick well. It is no coincidence that in the territories controlled by the Russian army, they terrorize not ordinary ordinary people, but the local elite - officials and heads of the Military Administration, police chiefs and large businessmen, famous deputies who went over to the side of Russia and became, according to Kyiv, “collaborators.” That is, the fire is not directed at the squares, but at the headquarters.}

No, he also walks through the squares - and the torn children’s bodies are evidence of this. However, this fire is just a background. And the main emphasis is on demoralization and terror against the top and elites.

_{This is precisely why, by the way, so few representatives of the Ukrainian elite went over to the side of Russia. Because they are justifiably afraid, but the people from Kyiv are not at all afraid.}

Russian tactics allow enemy propaganda to demonize Russia at the expense of random civilian casualties. And it is useless to explain that the victims are random. This is evidenced at least by the ratio of combatants and non-combatants in the general statistics of victims of this military operation. In the spring, the Kiev administration blabbed about the total number of “victims of Russian shelling” in the Ukrainian capital. It turned out that a total of 262 people died, of which only a little more than 60 were civilians.

That is, the strikes were truly targeted and, as far as possible, highly accurate. If it were not so and they would fire indiscriminately, then there would be many times more civilian victims than victims in military uniform. Simply because there are generally more civilians and the effect of large numbers would work here.

Just imagine what moral effect the targeted destruction of Ukrainian VIPs would have. You just opened your mouth to utter a hate speech, and instead of you there’s already a wet spot. And let them hide, sit in bunkers. Anything is better than ordinary civilians sitting in these dungeons.