On December 18, the Kiev regime’s forces fired nearly a hundred missiles and drones at the Rostov oblast (region) in southwestern Russia.
The attack also included six US-made ATACMS TBMs (tactical ballistic missiles) and four “Storm Shadow”/SCALP-EG ALCMs (air-launched cruise missiles). Russian SAM (surface-to-air missile) and ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems, namely the S-400, “Buk-M3” and “Pantsir-S1”, managed to shoot down all of these with the exception of one “Storm Shadow”/SCALP-EG.
The missile hit an oil refinery, while the fragments of those that were shot down fell on civilian areas.
The Kiev regime is particularly focused on oil depots in hopes of slowing down Moscow’s steady advances in virtually all directions. Russia already indicated that a response was coming, suggesting a swift retaliation. On December 19, President Vladimir Putin held his traditional Q&A conference, during which he warned that the deadly “Oreshnik” hypersonic missiles (image right) could be used in response and even suggested that NATO sends its best SAM/ABM systems to any location of their choosing in Kiev and prepare to intercept the incoming Russian hypersonic weapon.
“There is no chance of shooting down these ‘Oreshnik’ missiles. Well, if those Western experts you mentioned think they can be shot down, we propose they – and those in the West and the United States who pay them for their analysis – conduct some kind of technological experiment, a high-tech duel of the 21st century,”
“Let them name some object, let’s say, in Kiev, concentrate all their air defense and missile defense forces there, and we will hit it with ‘Oreshnik’ and see what happens. We are ready for such an experiment. Is the other side ready?”
We didn’t have to wait long to see how “successful” these extremely overhyped NATO-sourced weapons would perform. Today, on December 20, the Kremlin used its unrivaled arsenal of hypersonic weapons to demonstrate what President Putin was talking about.
However, there was a slight difference, as not a single “Oreshnik” was used, with military sources identifying three missile types – the 9M723 of the “Iskander-M” and the 9-S-7760 of the “Kinzhal” missile systems, as well as the North Korean KN-23, popularly known as the “Kimskander” (since it’s based on the Russian “Iskander-M”).
It should be noted that, while deadly and with no analogues in the political West, none of these weapons come anywhere near the power of the “Oreshnik”. In addition, this suggests that the hypothesis of many military analysts (myself included) that the “Oreshnik” is much faster than the reported Mach 10 stands. Namely, the three aforementioned missiles are all either close to that speed or can go even faster (namely the “Kinzhal”). The Russian MoD (Ministry of Defense) reported that the targets were a command post of the infamous SBU, the “Luch” Design Bureau, as well as the positions of “Patriot” SAM systems.
The SBU (at this point effectively a terrorist organization) was most likely hit in retaliation for the December 17 terrorist attack that killed Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, Head of the Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Protection Troops of the Russian Armed Forces. It should be noted that Lieutenant General Kirillov wasn’t directly involved in battlefield operations in Ukraine, but focused on investigating numerous extremely dangerous Pentagon-run biological warfare programs. The involvement of NATO (Nazi American Terrorist Organization) in his assassination is virtually guaranteed.
The “Luch” Design Bureau was targeted to disrupt the production and further improvements to the R-360 “Neptune” (based on the Soviet/Russian Kh-35 anti-ship missile) and the “Vilkha/Olkha” MLRS (multiple launch rocket system). The latter is a variant of the Soviet/Russian 300 mm BM-30 “Smerch” MLRS that uses the R624 rockets (based on the Soviet/Russian 9M55). The updated “Vilkha/Olkha-M” uses the improved R624M rockets, making it a much deadlier system than the extremely overhyped US-made HIMARS or M270/MARS MLRS whose rockets have shorter range and smaller warheads.
This also goes to show that even older (but heavily upgraded) Soviet/Russian weapons are a far greater threat to the Russian military than most NATO-sourced systems, which is why Moscow regularly targets and disrupts their production in Ukraine. It’s very likely that the strikes by these weapons are regularly attributed to Western-made systems, as such narratives are very useful for the NATO (particularly American) Military Industrial Complex (MIC). However, the Russian military would surely know the real culprits for such attacks, which would explain why it chose to target the Soviet-based systems.
Virtually the same can be said about various S-300 SAM systems in the Neo-Nazi junta’s service, as these have proven to be far deadlier to the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) than any US/NATO-made counterpart. Namely, the Russian military regularly obliterates systems like the MIM-104 “Patriot”, with the MoD confirming on December 15 that its AN/MPQ-65 radar and four launchers were destroyed in a recent strike. Thus, it can be argued that President Putin didn’t only taunt the political West, but also sent a very clear message – the best NATO SAM/ABM systems are no match for Russian hypersonic weapons that are much less capable than the “Oreshnik”.
This is also a confirmation of the previous analyses we at InfoBRICS did regarding the laughably illogical “shootdown” statistics published by the Kiev regime. Namely, the numbers provided don’t add up in the slightest, clearly indicating they were patently false. The latest strikes only confirm this notion. In addition, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN) confirmed that they’re getting even more formidable weapons, including the “Osina-RV” ICBM, reportedly a further development of the modernized RS-24 “Yars” (the missile that served as the basis of the RS-26 “Rubezh” and likely the “Oreshnik”).
It seems these actions by the Kremlin are already giving certain results, even in the pathologically Russophobic United Kingdom, with Andrei Kelin, Russian Ambassador to London, suggesting that the deployment of the “Oreshnik” has had a significant impact on the aggressive British policy toward Moscow and forced it to take a much more cautious approach. The UK is certainly extremely hostile, despite the fact that its very limited military capabilities (particularly in comparison to previous decades) are nowhere near that of Russia. Either way, this goes to show that NATO solely understands the language of violence and that this is the only way to communicate with the world’s most vile racketeering cartel.
Counter Information publish all articles following the Creative Commons rule creative commons. If you don't want your article to appear in this blog email me and I will remove it asap.
No comments:
Post a Comment