Allowing a flow of NATO weapons into Ukraine would be retarded.
Allowing a flow of hostile irregulars into Ukraine would be similarly retarded, for multiple reasons.
You're clearly just operating from the position that the strike must have been aimed at detering foreign volunteers, and are working backwards to justify that conclusion in place of having actual evidence to that effect.
Even if they are low quality, they are more bodies on the field.
They're not "on the field", they're in training and won't be ready to deploy for weeks. By which time Russia will have already won and the point will be moot, at least according to the putin brigade here, who've been insisting that we're witnessing the beginning of the end of the war since like day 3 of the war.
Some of them are not low quality, having real military or medical experience that could prove useful.
Medical experience is irrelevant, wounded Ukrainian soldiers will be out action for weeks anyway, the only injuries that could see wounded men sent back to the front are ones minor enough you don't need a lot of skill to treat them. Military experience is only marginally more valuable, as the people with the most useful military skills are Ukrainian soldiers, who know more about Ukrainian weapons, equipment, tactics, local terrain, etc than any foreign volunteer, and are far more likely to stick around as an insurgent compared to the foreigners.
Foreigners showing up to fight can benefit UkA morale, which will make getting a surrender harder.
What's going to convince you that your position is hopeless and surrender is preferable, the Russians bombing someone else hundreds of miles in an attack you might not even hear about, or the Russians bombing you?
And if you mean pressure against the Ukrainian government, Zelenskyy hasn't shown any sign of breaking yet and is far more focused on the actions of western governments then a tiny handful of their citizens, so I don't see why this would work then either.
Most importantly, a foreign legion is a fine cover for a force of globalist military contractors, which Russia has had to deal with before in the past. The last thing Russia needs is an open door policy for mercenaries and false-flagging spooks. Even after they win the war, those people would be a liability in enforcing peace, because they won't care about whether Ukraine ends up in another ruinous war, but meeting globalist objectives.
And bombing this base will stop the evil globalist from slipping thier agents into Ukraine......how, exactly? Idiot redditors might flake out once reality sets in, professional mercs won't, because that's what being a professional merc
means.
And the biggest issue with you approach here is that I can just make up whatever I want to be true and contrive a reason for it to be so, and be on just as firm ground as you.
Consider this, Putin bombed the base, but didn't destroy it, and it's very hard to actually destroy the sort of infrastructure you need to train soldiers with just bombs anyway, since all you really need is some open space, space for people to sleep, a few instructors, and time. You could do it out in the middle of nowhere and move the camp around. Putin cannot just "cut off" the flow of outside volunteers and supplies, not from the air anyway. He's had decades to learn from the US's example that you need ground forces for that.
So, Putin cannot use military force to stop the flow of personal, not until he seizes the area and actually has troops in position to block off access. But what he can do is lie to people on the internet about doing so, since the effect of an airstrike and the claim of such a strike will look the same on the internet, and he can count on people like you to propagandize for him and make up the difference.
Therefore, by my logic, which is also your logic since neither of us have any actual evidence or relevant expertise, any word about a Russian airstrike blowing up a bunch of redditors is fake.
carnegieendowment.org
www.forbes.com
