I don't think I'll ever understand why they project this kind of information. Keep your mouth shut and deliver them in secret. Let the Russians find out about it when they're looking at the Kerch bridge swimming in the water.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 5 points 2 weeks ago

This is a good idea if you force them to defend places you were not really attacking. Thus ensuring places that you do attack have less defense Or if they don't defend those places you attack them. It missiles were free and unlimited this would be bad, but since they are not psychology is often more important than the damage they do.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 4 points 2 weeks ago

They should announce this and make a big deal about it. "Withdraw from Crimea or we strike the bridge!" Let them build up defensese there and then strike some other critical point. Do that twice and on the third time really attack the place that's threatened.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Sometimes it is worth rattling your saber so the enemy knows you have one to rattle.

Announcing additional capabilities can have the effect of informing your enemy that the gloves are coming off.

It’s an effort to tip the scales without having to actually do anything, the real trick is if the statement is backed up by action

[–] schnokobaer 2 points 2 weeks ago

I can tell you why: Merz just wants to get on the news cycle with something popular. If you're not going to do it either way there's no point in secrecy.

[–] Cobrachicken@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I'd say disinformation, but unfortunately Merz seems to be too dumb for that.