>

As long as they keep one on standby they haven’t run out. He’s just saying they’ll never fire their last rocket.
Judging from past Kremlin statements that means that they've just run out of rockets. >

They could hardly have stated it more clearly if they'd painted themselves purple and danced naked on top of a harpsichord, singing 'We've just run out of rockets.' >

Ahh, the Baldrick school of information warfare. >

Are the words 'I have a cunning plan' marching with ill-deserved confidence in the direction of this conversation? >

Alright I get you, so this means they are about to run out. >

Yes. Running low for certain just like support. >

Just like trained troops >

The troops will be the new rockets. >

“Ok, Vlad, as part of a new directive, we need you to strap this bomb to yourself and hop inside this comically-sized cannon that the circus donated to our glorious armed forces”
“Why?”
“It is not your place to ask questions, comrade” >

Ork stormboyz >

Orks may not be the smartest but even they know when to replace a warboss thats getting them nowhere. >

Russian soldiers = wish.com orks >

Spat my Pepsi all over my shirt there, thanks for that. >

So Russia is out of rockets is what I'm hearing? I can't tell with all of the nonsense double talk that comes out of Putin these days. >

The Russians are having a rough time keeping their tube artillery supplied with shells, which are much easier to manufacture.
They are almost certainly having a much harder time with rockets, especially since a significant chunk of the resources for missile production were imported.
They'll likely never run entirely out of rockets - domestic production will keep some moving to the front - but the amount they'll be able to shoot long term will be constrained. >

Yeah they make enough domestically to do a salvo every once in awhile. Some of the missiles fired have been found to have been produced in the last 2 months. Meaning Russia has likely run out of old stock. So they probably have to reduce the number of massive missile strikes to once every month or 2. They make about 75 precision missiles a month.
With Ukraine getting more air defense I don't see this as an effective strategy. >

I'm still flabbergasted that this all started with Russia having literal boots on the ground in Kyiv on day one and now the war is coming down to Russian logistics and stockpiles of munitions. Like what the fuck happened Russia? This is far from over but my god what an absolutely shit show from the start. >

An absolute amazing win for the US also, completely kneecap the "second" strongest army in the world with no troops and not even with half our military budget >


not even with half our military budget

It's more like 5% and almost all of it is surplus cold war tech we really don't need anymore. Just amazing value. >

$700 billion is just what it costs to keep the lights on and toilet paper in the stalls in the US Defense Department. 
Supporting Ukraine against Russia is absolutely the bargain of the century. There's probably couch cushions in the Pentagon that are hiding more than the $50-odd billion Ukraine has cost so far. >

And the conservatives will bitch and moan about sending them money. Now they care about being frugal. >

They are worried Putin's next bribe check will bounce. >

Putin is importing bottle rockets and roman candles from chinese fireworks companies >

Don't forget black cats there bad ass >

You forgot whistlin’ bungholes and spleen splitters. >

Hoosker dos?  Hoosker don'ts? >

Lmfao where's the good stuff? >

But… snakes and sparklers are the only kinds I like. >

Hahaha. I'm about to have a smoke and watch some dirty joe. >

Yeah, they pledged to "never" leave Kherson either.
Cruise missiles are a very expensive supply. While Russia may never "run out", there is a limit to how much they can produce of it per month, especially under electronics sanctions. It's cheaper for the West to help Ukraine to repair damaged generators than for Russia to expend a missile on one. 
The more pressing problem is finding a mass-produced and reliable counter to cheap Iranian drones which (sometimes) do the same thing at a small fraction of the cost of a cruise missile, and shooting down which costs Ukraine far more than the drone. Probably a lot of truck-mounted machine-gun AAs, WW2-style.
This drone campaign is a war of economic attrition rather than a decisive field battle. We need to make sure Ukraine's economics are more sustainable than Russia's. >

Pardon the dumb question… Russia is using what type of missile/rockets exactly? >

Kh-101, x22 and Kalibr. The Iranian drones have been absent for months but those were called shahid 136. >

Apparently the Iranian drones don’t do well in cold weather. >

Because they are using fucking diesel as a fuel. They are loud as hell and the fuel jellies in colder temperature. >

But they are 100 to 1 the cost of US drones .  Sometimes cheaper is better. Its a fiarly typical strategy for them.
You can give 1 guy a Javelin rocket that can take out a tank or chopper with almost absolute certainty or give 80 guys RPGs and one of them will eventually hit the target even if 2 dozen die trying
US is high cost , high effect, life preserving tactics .  Unfortionaly low cost throwing junk and canon fodder in large amounts is actually a effective tactic for beating high tech ., most people dont do it because its a high cost of human life and good chance of mission failure .  But Russia doesnt care...they will fail 100 times and cost thousand of life - but if they get it right once they will make it a national success story.
Gurilla tactics often beat standard military ones - on the flip side its also why Ukraine is winning because they have crippled the Russian regulars .
This is a SUPER unconventional war - I don't want to sound too academic on it but this would be an amazing study back at west point and would of loved to be back their studying this . >

Cheaper isn't the metric your looking for, it's effectiveness/$. The AK-47 isn't the cheapest gun, but if it were any cheaper it would loose a lot of its requirements. The fact that they work even when highly mistreated makes them so effective. Cheaper drones that do less damage per $ are worse. What is the case here is something to be seen. What people think doesn't matter, we'll have to wait and see how they work in the battle field, that's the only measure of effectiveness that matters.
And yes if you lose 2 dozen men per enemy tank, that's not effective. Even if the javelin costs 100x more, it's far more effective becauase you keep your full infantry. You have to consider the costs not just of the equipment, but training support and what happens when you lose a lot of people. Again Russia here is a great example of why these metrics matter far more than anything else in an invasion. If the enemy has 1000 tanks, that means you need to lose 24,000 soldiers, if the enemy has 5000 tanks, that's 60,000. That's a text book pyrrhic victory at best.
Russia's tactic of "just throw everything at it" never has worked on offensive. It only makes sense in a defensive or revenge war. Here soldiers do have a choice, they will have something to return to if they give up. So it's a lot harder to keep morale like this.
Guerrilla tactics do not really work better than standard military unless you are fighting a civil war. People always assume that the guerrilla > standard military because of Vietnam. But the reality was that the Viet Cong had a lot of civil support and many civilians resented the US as another oppressor. What the US learned from this is that it's important to have support of them population and it's important to make sure soldiers behave well with the locals. Otherwise the US would have lost Afghanistan and Iraq, where the opposition quickly degraded you guerilla tactics. Russia here is seen as the oppressor, and struggles. Ukraine has been able to effective leverage guerilla tactics to support their traditional warfare very effectively against Russia, helping them recover territory at high speeds. As they move into territory that has less support this will get less effective.
The fact is that a war like this hasn't been fought in decades. Unconventional requires a convention but it doesn't apply here. This is a waste of conquest which is rare. In the last 75 years the wars we haven't seen a war like this happen, so we get to see how the tech has evolved and changed wars in that time. Certainly what historians and tacticians will be looking back at this a lot and it will define a lot about how future wars will be fought. >

I don't think some of your point make logical sense here.  
For example "Cheaper drones that do less damage per $ are worse."  That exactly the opposite point for example...they don't do less damage per dollar.They do the same damage for fraction of the cost  so they whole point of using cheap thing in high volume is that they still cost less.
​
Your example about the javelin is a great example of the American military doctrine but my whole point is Life is cheap and meaningless to the Russians - your thinking strictly from a saving life stand point with highly trained soldiers that America looks at as cost savings using a rocket that cost 100 times the cost of an RPG to preserve fighting force and highly trained soldiers.
Russia doesn't care if it loses 20 soldiers with cheap RPGS as long as it didnt cost them as much as a Javelin . They have no value on the human life part. 
Russia gives these guys minimal training and has little to no value for their regular soldiers , let alone their conscripts ..  For Christ sake they dropped off dozens of battalion sized conscript groups at the front lines with 2 weeks of training - shovels and sandbags , pistols with only 2-3 clips of ammo and almost no reserve ammo and rusty MGs that weigh upwards of 180 lbs that no one knew how to crew properly.  Many of these groups set defenses and immediately surrendered .  The point i do fully agree with you is the tactics they use work when defending but not on offense - even with Russia threatening jail time for retreat , they just surrender instead . 
​
Russia give the Guerrilla tactics  exactly as you do because it a doctrine from the 80s.  So they blew alot of their resouses taking out the conventionial military bases, supply depots , airfields , radars etc.  Figuring after cripping the normal army they would walk in.
What they didnt count on was regional defenders hiding all over with COORDINATED hit and run tactics .  What made it quite more effective the traditioned GT tactics is that it was organized. the Militias are registered with the state in Ukraine and given comms equipment and instructions on how to communicate and take orders from a central command .  Giving them all the advantages of GT tactics backed by traditional tactics and coordination.  Russia could of never expected well armed and coordinated micro Militias receiving orders and cutting supply lines with surgical accurate and rapid response . ITs unheard of in the modern theater but so is a full land invasion's of a industrialized polulation center in the modern era. 
A lot of your examples are exactly the type of thinking on why Russia is losing - for the past 40 years all of that made complete sense , but now you have Trained , armed , unpaid and self maintained and supplied regional defenders WITH A COMMAND structure.   
You can't image how incredible that is and again unheard of in the modern era - this is an event that will be studied for decades! 
The after effects especially -because while it is a MASSIVE advantage right now - at the end of the war you will now have heavy equipped well trained militia , that during the war were happy to take orders but are not under no obligation to continue to take orders.  It could lead to warlords or terrorist arenizations .
Not even counting the azov battalian and that potential powder keg.  You might have extreme loyalist that become terrorist to Russia let alone the internal threat   It going to be a case of one of the most effective defense against a standing traditional army in history but the after effect will need to be closely watched. >

So russia is running dangerously low on rockets. Good to know. >

Their autocorrect put "rockets". They meant "rocks". >

So girl rocks maybe? >

Rockettes? >

Rock Lobsters. >

“ proceeds to run out of rockets” >

"cruise missiles shot down with manpads" >

“We have the cheat codes from a Nintendo 64 version of GoldenEye.  We have unlimited golden gun and proximity mines while NATO is regulated to slaps only.” >

"We demand that Ukraine stop playing Oddjob immediately." >

We won’t hesitate to resort to paintball mode. Dam. Get that big head placed in a facility >

Stop strafe running and grenade boosting! >

'The Gang Runs Out of Rockets' >


“Oh, Putin- you dumb bitch.” >

Yeah when did the gang get so hard on Dee, anyway. >

I think the Flipadelphia episode is where they started because they started including her in their schemes and she messes up a lot in simple ways, like not moving the dumpster properly in the Charlie Work episode. >

I pledge to never run out of money. That was easy! >

Good thing too, we were about to run out of money. >

Ukraine need long-range missiles to destroy all Russian bombers, missile ships and facilities that continue to build all those "infinite" rockets. >

They have been reaching deep into Russia with home brewed suicide drones, pretty crazy. Couple more months and they may have their own domestic cruise missile type things going too. And with western help, no bueno for Russia. >

Yeah. It's Soviet drone Tu-141 Strizh from 1970-80s (same one that crashed in Croatia). There are only 152 units that were produced and after USSR collapse most of them were left in Ukraine. So UAF will run out of them pretty soon (who knows how much of them didn't fully rot in storage). >

Yeah definitely not an unlimited supply, but they may be able to reverse engineer them too. Production may be a problem but with the entire western world helping, I think they can manage it. >

Meaning they just ran out of rockets. >

Pledging means nothing. I can pledge 1 million dollars to Russia, doesn’t mean they’ll see a cent >

"I pledged the entire amount!" >

i uSe pLeDge AnD DoNaTe sYNOnYmouSly. >

that means they are already out. >

"Sir. We just ran out of rockets." - Russian General
"Find me a window!" - Putin >

sigh 
No, a window higher than the 3rd floor. >

Have to be careful about attacking Moscow--do a right job of it and there won't be any 4th floor windows left to push generals out of. /s >

There is something oddly reassuring about Putin's promises. They have been consistent in their outcomes. >

That is how I read this too. "Oh. I did not realize you were so close to being out that you had to declare the opposite already." Good to know. >

"Got about 2 more days worth of rockets then" is what I thought. Many Ukrainians could die if Kremlin was self-aware enough to just tell the truth at some critical moment. >

They can "pledge" whatever they want. Hell they can "pledge" to not lose 100,000 troops in a war of aggression against a much smaller country, but that doesn't actually mean shit. >

Ukraine should have the right to actually put some hurt on Putin, untie the other arm. >

They are. They send cruise missiles and special forces.
They are just a bit more civilised about what they shoot at!
Military airfields and fuel storage are good targets.
Russia likes to shoot at houses and hospitals. >

Who would have thought that wasting your missiles on civilian infrastructure would not only make everyone hate you, but also massively limit your ability to hit actual military targets? >

What an odd thing to pledge, replace rockets with literally anything else and it's even weirder - "Russia pledges to never run out of socks". Both are untrue, both are weird. >

"We have rockets.  We have all the best rockets." >

"We have a yuge stockpile  of rockets.  Like you wouldn't believe." >

Billions and Billions and Billions and Billions and Billions and Billions... >

Their rockets will blot out the sun! 
But they only fire at night, so you probably don't see them. >

Is that lemon scented pledge? >

Shut the fuck up and withdraw from Ukraine >

This could be a sign that they are running out of rockets.  Usually when Russia say something, the opposite is true.  There are also reports that they are trying to acquire Iranian rockets - which could indicate that they are running down their stockpile .... >

Russia likes to throw conflicting information out to be fair. It’s maskirovka. >

yeah; and they're also fucking lying cunts. >

I say the same thing about toilet paper, but then I find myself with a cardboard tube on the roller. Shit happens, Vlad. >

Why don't we give ukraine the C-RAM, it seems like it would be super cost effective against these cheap drone and missle attacks over the patriots >

A big problem of C-ram is range. It can only engage targets at up to 10km (about 6 freedom units) and as you know Ukraine is a very large country. You'd need quite a few of them just to cover Kyiv.
I wouldn't mind if they sent a few as they could help protect the most important facilities but I doubt it would be that much of a game changer. >

C-RAM was never meant to cover large areas.
It's a point defense system for critical areas.
Protecting power plants and infrastructure fits right in to its design. >

What does this mean? You can do this with one rocket if you never use it. >

Russia: We'll never run out of rockets!
NATO, CIA, NSA, anyone and everyone who's been monitoring Russian arms inventories: Son, people can see you! >

"You can't just declare unlimited rockets, Michael". >

Everything Russia says sounds like toxic schoolboys. >

Corrupt conservatives too >

I'm having trouble decoding the opposite-speak today.
Does this mean they will run out in the next few days, or that they have already run out and are secretly asking Iran for some more? >

Remember back when the USSR was overflowing with grain but it was being horded by the greedy Kulaks? 
Methinks that Russia has TONS AND TONS OF ROCKETS........ But they're not going to have them because some made up reason yadda yadda yadda.....
BUT REST ASSURED COMRADES WE HAVE ALL THE ROCKETS AND THE BEST ROCKETS! >

Well recently some Russian billionaires have fallen out of windows so he might have fixed that issue. >

I think the US needs to start being OK with Ukraine delivering some rockets to the Kremlin. >

Can we please turn that country into a fucking parking lot already. >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 75%. (I'm a bot)


Russia's Ministry of Defense pledged that it will "Never" run out of missiles after the country launched a barrage of missiles in Ukraine earlier on Thursday amid the ongoing war in the Eastern European country.
"We will never run out of Kalibrs," the ministry said on Telegram in an apparent reference to the missile strikes it launched in Ukraine as a response to an explosion on the Kerch bridge connecting the Taman Peninsula of Krasnodar Krai in Russia to with the Crimean peninsula, which Moscow annexed in 2014.
"Senseless barbarism. These are the only words that come to mind seeing Russia launch another missile barrage at peaceful Ukrainian cities ahead of New Year," Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba tweeted in a reaction to the Russian attacks.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: missile^#1 city^#2 Ukrainian^#3 Russian^#4 Ukraine^#5 >

Russia is gonna change official terminology so new years rockets can be counted as military arsenal >

Big talk from the guy passing out WWII muskets to his soldiers >

But they'll soon run out of "oligarchs" to throw out of windows. >

so, they're about out of rockets i take it? >

Translation: It will run out soon.... >

Sooo…..Russia is running out of rockets. >

soooo russia is about to run out of rockets huh? >

This is exactly what a person that has ran out of rockets 🚀 would say >

I mean if we haven't learned anything else, it's that every day is opposite day in Russia. Aka, I completely agree with you haha. >

And if the guy in charge of production doesn't fill his quotas he will fall from a window. >

While smoking. >

Don't speak Russian, but does "never" mean "by February"? >

He has tiny trump hands >

Cruise missiles getting shot down by manpads is kinda embarrassing. >

They are running out of rockets >

Ukraine just needs to drone the rocket factories. >

So.... They are running out then >

All they're doing making a big noise with very little military effect. For every missile that gets through Ukraine is shooting down four. That's an expensive way to get nowhere. The drones are  little more than a fireworks exhibition for Russian troops. For every 10 drones only one gets through maybe less. A complete waste of Russian resources. These Russian dopes who are in charge of the military apparently can't learn from their mistakes. >

Translation:  Russia is about to run out of rockets. >

The US never ran out of rockets in Nam too, how did that end? Also, there are already more dead Russian soldiers than all of US soldiers in every war they've been in since WW2 combined >

Jesus.  What exactly is Russia’s strategy at this point?  Just kill as many Ukrainian civilians as possible until their next generation of soldiers become adults?  Can Putin please just die already? >

If only Russia hadn’t wasted so many expensive cruise missiles attacking civilian targets in terror attacks, perhaps they wouldn’t be in this situation.
Perhaps if they put as much energy into fighting a war as they do looting, raping, murdering, and committing terrorist attacks, they might not be losing the war so badly.
But, it seems that Russia is incapable of helping itself. They just can’t help but to play war crime bingo, wasting valuable materiel just to vent their anger.