Ukraine Claims Huge Drone Attack on “More Than 40 Bombers”
Ukraine says it’s taken out over 40 Russian nuclear-capable bombers in Siberia, marking its boldest drone strike yet on Putin’s air power. The Mail has the story.
Dubbed “Operation Spiderweb”, the co-ordinated strikes have left Vladimir Putin humiliated and his prized warplanes in smouldering ruins, though Moscow has claimed to have “repelled” all the attacks.
Two remote military airfields, Olenya in the Arctic Murmansk region and Belaya in eastern Siberia, were rocked by massive explosions overnight, with dramatic footage showing fires raging for hours.
The bases, located thousands of miles from Ukraine, are key to Russia’s nuclear strike capability and were considered untouchable.
Yet Ukraine appears to have struck them with deadly precision, using first-person-view (FPV) drones launched from unmarked vans parked near the airfields.
Today’s drone attack on airbases across Russia is claimed to have targeted and at least damaged 34% of long-range cruise missile carriers used by the Russian Air Force for missile strikes against cities in Ukraine, according to the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU). pic.twitter.com/HtZvswjbm0
Both are thousands of miles from Ukraine but were “under drone attack”, with dozens of Moscow’s nuclear capable warplanes evidently destroyed.
Olenya airbase is home to Russia’s ageing fleet of Tu-95 ‘Bear’ bombers – used both for conventional missile strikes and capable of launching nuclear weapons against the West. Several of the aircraft were reportedly left exposed in the open, despite repeated Ukrainian attacks on similar facilities.
Ablaze, too, was Belaya nuclear airbase in eastern Siberia’s Irkutsk region – some 2,900 miles from Ukraine.
More alarmingly, the strikes have triggered frenzied calls within Russia’s military circles for a nuclear response. “Disabling strategic aircraft gives Russia the right to use nuclear weapons,” declared pro-Kremlin war analyst Vladislav Pozdnyakov. “Let me remind you.”
Russia’s nuclear doctrine allows for a nuclear response in the event of an attack on “critical government or military infrastructure”.
In particular, “an enemy attack that disrupts the operation of nuclear forces, threatening Russia’s ability to respond” could lead to Putin ordering an atomic strike.
Ukraine’s SBU secret service was reportedly conducting a large-scale special operation to destroy Russian bombers.
The Ukrainian media claimed more than 40 Putin aircraft had been hit, including Tu-95, Tu-22M3 and A-50 strategic bombers.
The damage to the enemy was alleged to exceed £1.5 billion.
A driver of a truck filled with drones that attacked Olenegorsk in Murmansk “may not have known about the cargo”, said a report.
According to Baza media, the driver has been detained.
“A truck stopped at a gas station at the entrance to the city… drones started flying out of the back of the truck and then attacked various objects,” said a report. …
”he audacious strike was described as “Russia’s Pearl Harbour’ and the “blackest day in aviation” for the country by pro-Putin Telegram channels.
Before ‘negotiations’? The UK is really pushing for a nuke war. Ukraine is gonig to find itself obliterated if this goes on. I have no idea why Putin and the Russians don’t completely wipe out Ukraine. One day they will. US-Empire/NATO is simply a criminal org looking for wars.
I’m generally sympathetic to the idea that the west is largely responsible for provoking this conflict.
However, once you invade another country, this idea by Russia that they can strike Ukraine but Ukraine mustn’t strike them back seems a bit ridiculous.
Once you start a war, provoked or not, expect your opponent to try to hit you back.
That said, let’s hope the threat of a nuclear strike is the one bluff Putin was making. Because so far he hasn’t bluffed.
The war is developing not necessarily to Russia’s advantage. Probably time to think not of the underlying causes of the war, those are demographic, impossible to resolve, but of the consequences of the war ending. Because that is why the war cannot end. ‘When it comes to Kremlin logic, it’s not about Lavrov, or Medinsky, or Shoigu, or Medvedev — it’s about no one, because this is an absolute monarchy where everything is decided by one man, and everyone else is his vassal. Putin decides what will happen, how, when, and whether it will happen at all. So we have to look at how he views the situation. Let’s sit in his chair and ask — what does ending the war mean for him? It means he’ll have to explain to his zombified, savage population what exactly he achieved by sacrificing a million lives and barely gaining a foothold in two regions — which he didn’t even fully capture. Did he demilitarize Ukraine? Force it into neutrality? Secure the status of the Russian language? Of course not.’ ‘one must also consider how Putin could convert Russia’s militarized economy to a civilian one if the war ends. He recalled the collapse… Read more »
An excellent overview, and as you say, it is all in one mans hands, for now. The future is another day.
Grim Ace
10 months ago
So attacking the means by which Russia is bombing and killing its civilians is unfair and dangerous? And I still don’t get why we are so anti Ukraine. Poland in 1939 (the cause celebre of world war 2 for us and France), was a dictatorship. Imagine if we’d just armed Poland rather than gone to war for them? Probably not quite the same scenario because those poor bstards were attacked by two
Socialisms; national and international (nazi Germany and The USSR)
Putin knows if he uses nukes its game over for Russia and everyone else.
it is not quite that bad because, despite the hype and myths, nuclear attacks can be survived. And I am not advocating or supporting the idea. It would be terrible and put the world back 200 years.
Funny thing too. UK & France declared war on Germany after it invaded Poland, but did not declare war on the USSR which invaded Poland a few days later from the opposite direction.
Why had the UK & France “guaranteed” Poland’s security in the first place? But more important: it was clear Germany’s ambitions were eastward toward Russia via Poland. That’s why Russia has signed a pact with Germany to give it time to mobilise and why it invaded Poland after Germany to establish a de facto front line between German and Russian forces.
UK & France declaration of war meant Germany had to deal with the enemy at its back, so turned westward, putting invasion of Russia on hold.
I know the story we are told, Hitler a threat to the World, we would be next, etc but German forces ended up like Napoleon’s forces – getting into Russia is easy, getting out again isn’t.
All “we” had to do was wait – build up our forces just in case.
The ageing strategic nuclear bombers attacked – in Siberia well away from the conflict – were not being used by Russia to bomb anybody.
The attack is intended to provoke severe Russian reprisals in the hope that the idiots in NATO will send in forces and join the hostilities and then we can gave WWIII.
Heretic
10 months ago
One day people will wake up and realize that Communist Putin & Communist Zelensky have been in cahoots all along, as well as the Communist UN, Communist EU and Communist UK Uniparty— all united with ONE GOAL:
Reports: an 18 month operation inside Russia in which drones were assembled in shed/warehouses, loaded into trailers and driven to points near the airfields, and drones launched from the trailers. Locals climbed on top of the trailers to try to block the hatches, and Russians report many drones destroyed. Two trailers blew up.
Initial Russian reports: 5 Tu-95, 2 Tu-22 and 1 An-12.
That toll might change if the Russians are more forthcoming.
But… aging strategic bombers capable of carrying nuclear warheads? Certainly embarrassing for the Russians but of what strategic value to Ukraine since these planes aren’t being used over Ukraine?
Of course if it prompts a massive response from Russia, with any luck the idiots in NATO will openly get involved then we can have a nice WWIII.
Claphamanian
10 months ago
An unfortunate reference to Pearl Harbour. But for whom?
Or is it in any unintended consequences more like Imperial Germany’s commencement of unrestricted submarine warfare?
How would Washington react to such an attack on their strategic nuclear forces?
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Who has given Ukraine the go ahead?
UK-NATO. UK is out of control. The uncivil unelected service is leading all of us into a nuclear war.
Scott Ritter’s message to Trump after the Ukrainian attack on Russia’s nuclear bombers.
“Choose Ukraine and trigger a nuclear war.
Choose Russia and save the world.”
https://scottritter.substack.com/p/playing-with-fire?publication_id=6892&post_id=164935563&isFreemail=true&r=1ninci&triedRedirect=true
From Wikipedia:
Clearly, not ‘Russia’s Pearl Harbour’
And Japan went on the win the war…..oh, wait. The most important target for the attack were the aircraft carriers who were not there
Before ‘negotiations’? The UK is really pushing for a nuke war. Ukraine is gonig to find itself obliterated if this goes on. I have no idea why Putin and the Russians don’t completely wipe out Ukraine. One day they will. US-Empire/NATO is simply a criminal org looking for wars.
I’m generally sympathetic to the idea that the west is largely responsible for provoking this conflict.
However, once you invade another country, this idea by Russia that they can strike Ukraine but Ukraine mustn’t strike them back seems a bit ridiculous.
Once you start a war, provoked or not, expect your opponent to try to hit you back.
That said, let’s hope the threat of a nuclear strike is the one bluff Putin was making. Because so far he hasn’t bluffed.
I for one can’t say who started this war.
No one asked you to do so. Formost people the evidence is clear.
First of all you have to understand when it started and that was 2014.
Glad I started prepping during the Biden regime.
The war is developing not necessarily to Russia’s advantage. Probably time to think not of the underlying causes of the war, those are demographic, impossible to resolve, but of the consequences of the war ending. Because that is why the war cannot end. ‘When it comes to Kremlin logic, it’s not about Lavrov, or Medinsky, or Shoigu, or Medvedev — it’s about no one, because this is an absolute monarchy where everything is decided by one man, and everyone else is his vassal. Putin decides what will happen, how, when, and whether it will happen at all. So we have to look at how he views the situation. Let’s sit in his chair and ask — what does ending the war mean for him? It means he’ll have to explain to his zombified, savage population what exactly he achieved by sacrificing a million lives and barely gaining a foothold in two regions — which he didn’t even fully capture. Did he demilitarize Ukraine? Force it into neutrality? Secure the status of the Russian language? Of course not.’ ‘one must also consider how Putin could convert Russia’s militarized economy to a civilian one if the war ends. He recalled the collapse… Read more »
An excellent overview, and as you say, it is all in one mans hands, for now. The future is another day.
So attacking the means by which Russia is bombing and killing its civilians is unfair and dangerous? And I still don’t get why we are so anti Ukraine. Poland in 1939 (the cause celebre of world war 2 for us and France), was a dictatorship. Imagine if we’d just armed Poland rather than gone to war for them? Probably not quite the same scenario because those poor bstards were attacked by two
Socialisms; national and international (nazi Germany and The USSR)
Putin knows if he uses nukes its game over for Russia and everyone else.
it is not quite that bad because, despite the hype and myths, nuclear attacks can be survived. And I am not advocating or supporting the idea. It would be terrible and put the world back 200 years.
Put the world back 200 years? 1825? Don’t tell the Green loons.
Poland in 1939 was a dictatorship – but Ukraine isn’t? Geez !!
Funny thing too. UK & France declared war on Germany after it invaded Poland, but did not declare war on the USSR which invaded Poland a few days later from the opposite direction.
Why had the UK & France “guaranteed” Poland’s security in the first place? But more important: it was clear Germany’s ambitions were eastward toward Russia via Poland. That’s why Russia has signed a pact with Germany to give it time to mobilise and why it invaded Poland after Germany to establish a de facto front line between German and Russian forces.
UK & France declaration of war meant Germany had to deal with the enemy at its back, so turned westward, putting invasion of Russia on hold.
I know the story we are told, Hitler a threat to the World, we would be next, etc but German forces ended up like Napoleon’s forces – getting into Russia is easy, getting out again isn’t.
All “we” had to do was wait – build up our forces just in case.
But we didn’t. And we are doing it again.
The ageing strategic nuclear bombers attacked – in Siberia well away from the conflict – were not being used by Russia to bomb anybody.
The attack is intended to provoke severe Russian reprisals in the hope that the idiots in NATO will send in forces and join the hostilities and then we can gave WWIII.
One day people will wake up and realize that Communist Putin & Communist Zelensky have been in cahoots all along, as well as the Communist UN, Communist EU and Communist UK Uniparty— all united with ONE GOAL:
TO EXTERMINATE THE WHITE MAN.
Zelenskyy claims 117 drones involved.
Reports: an 18 month operation inside Russia in which drones were assembled in shed/warehouses, loaded into trailers and driven to points near the airfields, and drones launched from the trailers. Locals climbed on top of the trailers to try to block the hatches, and Russians report many drones destroyed. Two trailers blew up.
Initial Russian reports: 5 Tu-95, 2 Tu-22 and 1 An-12.
That toll might change if the Russians are more forthcoming.
But… aging strategic bombers capable of carrying nuclear warheads? Certainly embarrassing for the Russians but of what strategic value to Ukraine since these planes aren’t being used over Ukraine?
Of course if it prompts a massive response from Russia, with any luck the idiots in NATO will openly get involved then we can have a nice WWIII.
An unfortunate reference to Pearl Harbour. But for whom?
Or is it in any unintended consequences more like Imperial Germany’s commencement of unrestricted submarine warfare?
How would Washington react to such an attack on their strategic nuclear forces?