A neo-Nazi militia launched a cross-border raid from Ukraine into Russia’s Belgorod region on Monday using US armored vehicles, Financial Times reported Tuesday.
Denis Nikitin, leader of the Russian Volunteer Corps, said his fighters who attacked Belgorod were in possession of US armored vehicles, including at least two M1224 MaxxPro armored vehicles, known as MRAPs, and several Humvees. Videos and pictures posted by Russia’s military corroborated Nikitin’s claims.
Nikitin is a well-known extremist who has ties to neo-Nazis across the world and has his own white nationalist clothing line. According to Financial Times, the Russian Volunteer Corps “includes self-avowed neo-Nazis.”
The group was formed in 2022 and is said to be comprised of Russian citizens who have volunteered to fight for Kyiv. Some of its members signed up to fight in the Donbas war back in 2014 and are Azov Battalion veterans.
Nikitin would not say how his fighters acquired the US-made armored vehicles. Ukrainian intelligence officials have acknowledged that they cooperate with the Russian Volunteer Corps and another group that launched the assault, the Freedom of Russia Legion.
“Of course, we communicate with them. Of course, we share some information,” Andriy Chernyak, a Ukrainian military intelligence official, told Financial Times. “And, one might say, we even cooperate.”
Chernyak denied supplying the Russian volunteers with equipment and claimed that they launched the operation on their own. However, The Times of London reported that Discord leaks show Ukraine had been planning attacks on Russian territory using Russian volunteer groups for some time. One document said the Russian citizens fighting for Ukraine are armed with “various qualitative types of NATO weapons.”
State Department spokesman Matthew Miller was asked about the news of US weapons being used in attacks on Belgorod and said he was “skeptical” of the reports. He insisted the US does not “encourage or enable strikes inside of Russia” but said it’s “up to Ukraine to decide how to conduct this war.”
The goal of that Ukrainian neo-Nazi suicidal operation in Belgorod was to distract attention of the world media from their defeat in Bakhmut.
Maybe.
From what I can tell, NATO and Ukraine has kind of started their counter offensive. They had their earlier river crossing, a large attack on Artyomovsk that totally failed (expected result was that the city would keep its Ukrainian name of Bakhmut and battle lines would move east from there), flank attacks to surround Artyomovsk that have been stopped, and now this.
So far, the counter offensive has completely failed. It has also failed in a way that has caused damage to the reputation of the US. And now we are calling in our F-16s to make the next phase more successful.
At this point I do not know what counteroffensive stands for. Terrorist acts against civilians and infrastructure may feel good, but it will not solve anything. It may complicate things.
It is not official of course, but Russia did publish results of their investigation into the disappearance of Gen Zaluzhni. According to this report he sustained serious injuries, the most serious being head injury requiring a surgery. He has many other shrapnel wounds. Recovery complicated due to his diabetis. He is expected to survive, but he is not likely to return to active duty.
“At this point I do not know what counteroffensive stands for.”
Nobody else seems to know, either. It’s just a term that keeps getting thrown around. Every time the Ukrainians do something, anything, there’s a debate over whether that’s “the start of the counteroffensive.”
Given the current situation, I doubt there will be anything that could really be called a “counteroffensive.”
If the Russians can secure a line of control encompassing Donetsk and Luhansk, then the Ukrainian troops might pretend that they’re conducting a “counter-offensive” when they move back into the currently occupied parts of Kherson and Zaporizhia as the Russians abandon them for that line of control and a return to “frozen conflict.” But it’s not likely that you’ll see large Ukrainian formations making big moves against key Russian positions.
Unfortunately for Ukraine/NATO, this war can’t be frozen. When the earths dries, Russian army will start counteroffensive.
The Russian offensive has already culminated. It’s hard to digest Russia’s failure based on the pre-war assessment of their abilities but the facts-on-the-ground seem to be glaring.
You mean the INCURSION by the Russian, anti-Putin legions?
I’ll stop back when the ACTUAL counteroffensive begins…
They may call themselves neo-Nazis, but we call them liberators of Russis! Heros! CNN is gushing over this Volunteer group of presumed Russians bringing freedom and liberty to Russians. Having solud economy, like real production of things, food and energy, and the lowest inflation in Europe, makes Russians impervious to such manufactured “disidents”.
Vladimir Putin
Ukraine is at war with a much bigger foe.
Why would they not use these folks?
“Nazis” are an intregal part of their forces and likely the type of nuts who would love such action.
You all did not believe the comedian when he claimed these folks were just Russian lies, did you?
When you can’t defeat your enemy in a standup war then these are the kind of tactics you use. No surprise here. There will be much more of the same thing coming. The west will make the most of it.
50,000 here 50,000 dead there, that’ll win the war for Ukraine.
They have a huge country with many more soldiers then does Russia and those Ukrainian factories are just pushing arns out…..
Wait that’s Russia not Ukraine and those loses ars Ukraines as well.
Sure that city was a great move if you wanting to waste resources you do not have now if that was the plan.
The city is lost and Ukraine spent a lot to lose it.
Ukraine spent a lot to very slowly lose it, presumably for several reasons.
One is that control of Bakhmut is key to Russian ability to secure Donetsk as a whole. The longer they were denied Bakhmut, the longer they were denied Donetsk — which the Ukrainians would have needed even more troops to defend in depth as opposed to just at that one key point.
Another is that every day the war is lengthened, Ukraine’s munitions/supply/logistics situation improves relative to Russia’s. The longer the Russians took to secure Bakhmut, the harder it became to take every other objective.
And a third is that in a war of attrition, it’s better to be dug in on the defensive where you’re almost certainly inflicting more casualties than you’re taking.
Your entire argument is taken straight from western propaganda. You’re better than this, Thomas. You’ve seriously underestimated Russian capability and overestimated western capabilities. I encourage you to check out SimpliciusTheThinker on substack.
Of the top ten countries in the world by industrial output, eight are supporting Ukraine with arms, ammunition, etc.
So far, there’s no sign that the other two (China and India) are supporting, or have any plans to support, Russia– which itself has an industrial capacity a fraction of any ONE of that top ten.
Russia is in the same position today that the Confederacy was in the Civil War. Once Lee’s invasion of Maryland failed at Sharpsburg, it was just a matter of time before its relative deficit in the ability to manufacture or acquire arms made victory impossible.
The difference in the Russian situation is that it can probably bring the war to an end with at least some gains (Luhansk and Donetsk) before there would be any question of “collapse.” But if it wants to keep fighting until terms are simply dictated, it won’t be Russia doing the dictating.
I have just as much faith in those industrial output statistics as I do in the consumer price index and unemployment rate that the United States government puts out.
Then, if you’re smart, you’ll notice they’re only off by a factor of maybe one tenth, and that still puts the industry behind Ukraine much greater than that behind Russia.
After all, the CPI is at 5% inflation, while truflation is at 3%.
You’ve made a good point, but you should consider a few things.
1) the countries “backing” ukraine aren’t doing so 100%. Russia doesn’t need to outproduce all Ukraine’s backers. Russia only needs to outproduce the portion those backers are willing to share with Ukraine.
2) GDP numbers aren’t real numbers. Suppose a tank would cost 1 million on the free market, but because MIC is in bed with government, they’re buying it for 2 million. A GDP that’s twice as large doesn’t necessarily mean it’s producing twice as much stuff. This is particularly true of america.
3) Not all GDP is going into military production. By my calculations, the US does 3.7% of GDP, while Russia is doing 4.1%
1) True, the countries backing Ukraine aren’t doing so 100%. They don’t have to. If each of them put as much as 2% or so of their industrial capacity into arming Ukraine and Russia puts 100% of it industrial capacity into arming itself, Ukraine will be better armed than Russia and while those countries’ populations will notice the sacrifice, it will be fairly minor compared to the Russian population’s sacrifice.
2) “GDP numbers aren’t real numbers.” True. I think Russia is #9 or #10 on GDP. But I didn’t refer to GDP. I referred specifically to industrial output, where it’s further behind.
3) But since you want to discuss GDP, you mention that the US is putting 3.7% of it its $23 trillion GDP ($850 billion) into military stuff, while Russia is putting 4.1% of its $1.8 trillion $(74 billion) GDP into same. So if the US alone directs even 1/10th of its military spending — not 1/10th of its GDP, not 1/10th of its spending, 1/10th of its already existing MILITARY spending — to arms for Ukraine, it’s already well out-pacing Russia, even without the other Ukrainian supporters’ contributions.
Which is why the longer the war, the worse for Russia. Their strength is — or at least used to be — quick and efficient military victory on a limited scale.
If they’d quickly secured Donetsk and Luhansk, the fallout would pretty much have been the same as with Georgia. Their failure to get the job done in a timely manner meant the window closed on hope of a convincing “victory.” They’ll probably, at great sacrifice, manage to secure Donetsk and Luhansk eventually. But having to slink red-faced out of Kherson and Zaporizhia is going to be very embarrassing.
I don’t think you addressed the depth of my second argument. Whether talking about GDP or Industrial Output, it’s measured in currency, not the things people actually use to fight wars. And that’s problematic when you have a military industrial complex that churns out intentionally overpriced weaponry. And by overpriced, I don’t mean an extra 10% here or there. I mean, they’re doubling or tripling the price over what the free market would bare.
Now, I have no idea what russian missiles are comparable to what american missiles. But take Lockheed’s patriot missile production, which is currently at 250, and they’re planning to double it to 500 in the coming years. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/07/11/lockheed-to-double-patriot-missile-production-as-orders-explode/
250 is fewer than the number of Kh-35s that Ukraine claims russia is producing: 360. https://kyivindependent.com/how-many-missiles-does-russia-have-left/
So you can go from more money and more industrial output and more GDP and more everything, and end up with fewer missiles, because you’re wasting so much money on political favors to your buddy buddies in MIC.
America’s “industrial capacity” isn’t the relevant thing. For one thing, that’s measured in dollars not goods, for another, the vast majority of america’s industrial output is in farm and factory equipment. You can’t send John Deere to fight the war in Ukraine.
Yes, handling everything as a matter of currency is problematic. But calculating the differentials that aren’t captured in use of a currency denominator isn’t simple. Whether the Russian “public sector” military production is any less prone to … undue inflationary factors … is an open question.
The question is not so much how many of this or that any given party to the war IS producing as how many it CAN produce without really hurting itself elsewhere. Ukraine’s allies have so much more production capacity that the marginal cost of one million more artillery shells to the average American might represent an order of fries, while the marginal cost of one million more artillery shells to average Russian might be a couple of full meals. Which means the Russian regime not only has a lower production ceiling, period, but has less room between its current height and a popular discontent ceiling.
FYI, military contracts are a significant activity of John Deere. In any significant conflict, you’re probably going to see John Deere engines and tracks on military equipment. In any very large, extended conflict, they’ll probably be rolling actual tanks instead of dozers and loaders off their assembly lines.
I agree, Russia’s public sector military is guaranteed falling prey to the same corruption as america’s is. And we can’t measure that. That’s why I tried to number the actual goods being produced, the number of missiles. And that was 250 for america and 360 for Russia (according to Ukraine).
I understand that production lines can change. America soon will start producing 500 patriot missiles per year instead of 250. I also understand that this will cause hardly a hiccup in america’s economy. I’m confident doubling missile production would be more painful in russia, but I’m not confident it would be so much as to foment popular revolt.
But the very fact that russia is producing more missiles right now and on drastically less money than America does, indicates that Russia’s military is less prone to overpaying compared to America’s military. Not only that, but their missiles are hypersonic, which america has not fielded yet, I’m told for “scientific and policy reasons” only, to be sure. Couldn’t possibly be another boondoggle.
Production lines don’t change overnight. It takes a lot of time. It’s not nearly as clear cut as you make it sound.
Nothing is ever “clear cut.”
I have an opinion. Many people misinterpret that opinion as some kind of moral support for one regime and moral opposition to another, so let me state it as clearly and as concisely as I can:
The longer the war goes on, the more advantageous the situation becomes Ukraine has and the less advantageous it becomes for Russia.
Not because Ukrainians are “better” than Russians or because the Ukrainian regime’s territorial claims are morally superior to the Russian regime’s, or anything like that.
Simply because Russia has much less capacity to manufacture, deliver, and deploy arms, ammunition, and supplies than do the states aligned against Russia in the conflict.
Russia’s chance for a clear-cut, unambiguous “victory” lay in either 1) the old German concept of blitzkrieg (“lightning war”) — a quick maneuver campaign that seized the intended objectives before the production/logistics differential could come into play; or 2) the unwillingness of the US/EU/NATO to throw in with their massive advantage in production/logistics. They failed on #1, and #2 didn’t go their way after that.
My opinion is not based on what I think OUGHT to be the situation. I opposed the US coup in Ukraine, supported the Ukrainian regime peacefully letting Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea go their own way, and hoped that the “west” would back the hell off from the idiotic “Ukraine in NATO” talk, etc., and would be glad to see the war end on any terms that the non-combatants in the war zone are willing to accept, whether either regime likes those terms or not.
My opinion is based on what I think IS the situation, as described above. It’s a prediction of future events and outcomes. It could be entirely wrong. And assuming I’m alive when we find out whether I was right or wrong, if I was wrong I’ll just admit that I blew the analysis, and move on. Just like I did last May when my prediction that the Russian forces would quickly spank Ukraine, shake their finger in Zelenskyy’s face, tell him to sin no more, and walk away with Donetsk, Luhansk, and a corridor connecting them to Crimea in hand turned out to have been wrong.
Oh, I know, I think you and I are 100% on the same page as to what “ought” to be. And I haven’t interpreted your comments as meaning you “like” ukraine more than russia or something. (although I’m sure some people here will think that).
But I still disagree that the gap between NATO’s and Russia’s military either now or in the future is as large as you think it is. Yes, NATO out guns russia. Yes, NATO outproduces russia. But it’s not by nearly as much as you’d expect, given the gap in our industrial base. And more importantly, the portion of production NATO is willing to share with Ukraine doesn’t seem like it’s enough to turn the tide.
Lockheed Martin is planning on doubling production, as I’ve already mentioned. And it seems almost all of those new missiles will be going to Poland, Romania and Sweden, not Ukraine.
You may be right.
And of course, there’s always the possibility of e.g. general economic collapses of the US or other regimes that just makes it impossible for them to continue supplying Ukraine.
I’m just going with the best numbers I can find and my own best rational application of my (admittedly limited) knowledge of how warfare works, to make my own assessments and predictions. I could be completely wrong. We’ll see.
Russia used a force akin to a foreign legion to burn up a lot of Ukrainian troops.
Your “logistics” works both ways (I have a cousin who set up a “logistic” system in Russia years ago, built a second home on lake Ozark from the proceeds of the job) so I’m sure the Russians are still “aware” of the issue and have resolved many early issues.
Ukraine can have the best logistic abilty in the world but it is dependent on others.
Will the stuff keep coming as the stores run dry and the factories need contracts to produce?
What is the trend?
More aid or are they using accounting tricks to claim they have funds?
Is the Democrats holding firm on a complete agreement on the war?
We know the GOP isn’t but the uber lefties are starting to peel and be vocal.
Macron’s France always likes to push against conventual wisdom represented by us and the Brits and that is becoming more vocal as is Hungary’s recalcitrance that appears to be building.
I look at trends and the trend seens to be a lessening of arms packages with big PR given to a few F16s as if those will change much in the near future.
Wait for the campaign in the US to ramp up. If we do go into recession and Trump hits Joe over foreign adventures while the economy sucks those aid packages will get smaller and smaller if they even happen.
Another view:
I’m a simple man. I see John Mearsheimer, I upvote. I don’t even know what claim it is he’s making.
John Mearsheimer states that Putin did not have any other options. He’s right about that.
Mary, I just love it when people who don’t have a responsibility to protect the Russian people against threats from foreign powers want to condemn Putin for intervening in Ukraine. Most of them being citizens of a certain regime whose interventions have caused the deaths of millions of innocent people and the displacement of tens of millions more, just over the last 30 years. How rich is that? And, as Ray McGovern recently pointed out, none of these people offer any reasonable alternatives that Putin could have chosen. I’ve posed the question to several of my friends, and gotten nothing but blank stares in response.
Right you are Johnnyo! And if you ask them to provide you with proof that Putin planned to reconstitute the old Soviet Union they can’t because they have never read any of Putin’s speeches or interviews. For kicks, I like to offer them $500 if they can come up with proof of Putin saying anything along that line. The most they can come up with is the line taken out of context that, “Anyone who doesn’t miss the old days of the Soviet Union has no heart.” They don’t say what Putin said in the next breath—“And anyone who wants to bring back the Soviet Union has no brain.”
“as Ray McGovern recently pointed out, none of these people offer any reasonable alternatives that Putin could have chosen”
Your refusal to notice when alternatives are offered is not the same thing as alternatives not being offered.
David Swanson, for example, offered 30 such alternatives.
When considering just who is threatening Russia and how they are being threatened, that is a laughably stupid article.
Supporting your view is none other than Prigozhin:
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1661130760978325505
I agree. Once the war is over and everything settles, many ally countries will be formally requesting Ukraine for military training assistance. They will want to learn the kind of modern warfare Ukraine has been waging.
I also agree with Prigozhin – it does not happen often but here and in a few other of his video’s in 2023 he has made some good points:
https://twitter.com/euronews/status/1639311342376194049
Modern Welfare Kingism running a war on charity. Pleas Mister can I have a few of your Jets…….???????
It’s hard to know what to make of Prigozhin. I wouldn’t place a lot of reliance on what he says. He seems to be a loose cannon as much as anything else. Pumping up the opponent he just defeated is intended to make his Wagner Group look good.
One view is that he was goading Ukraine to send lots of troops into Bakhmut, as it was called then, to die. One day Ukraine had a HUGE attack force in Bakmut. A few days later the town changed names.
Good point, it is not as if I just trust Prigozhin on his word, had they taken Bakhmut in a few weeks I would find his words highly suspect. Given how long it took them to take Bakhmut, I’m however as I see it left with two or three options:
1) The Russians are very far from the second best army in the world
2) The Russians have been sabotaging themselves in the one area they were advancing
3) Prigozhin is right and the Ukrainians are much better than I thought
There may be more options, but I can’t think of any reasonable ones right now.
Prigozhin has said that the goal of the Russians was not to capture Bakhmut, but to use it to lure as many Ukrainians as possible to their deaths. The operation was even named the Bakhmut Meatgrinder. I heard this earlier today, I believe, on The Duran.
I know, the Russians only wanted to lure Ukrainians into a trap, only I do not believe it, sure for the final few weeks the Ukrainian losses may have been closer to what the Russian ones were, but for the most of the battle the Russians were almost certainly significantly higher than the Russian ones.
Storming people who have had time to entrench themselves in very well fortified positions with a dearth of artillery is like that – and we have Prigizhin and several Russian TV pundits word for the shortage of shells – so no that was just a Russian propaganda spin – and what is the explanation for why they change their mind and decide to take it all?
Pretty standard military doctrine. Except that the artillery disparity changed the equation.
Or at least that is the Russian version. We will never know what the truth is.
I do remember lots of Americans expecting Ukraine to control Bakhmut instead of Russia controlling Artyomovsk. Hope I spelt the Russian name of the city correct.
There is so much fog of war that no one will ever know what really happened. This is a constant feature of this conflict.
Try theduran.locals.com It may dispel some of the fog for you…!!!!!!
The Russian names of the city are Bakhmut and Artyomovsk. The latter was just used by the Russian empire when that empire styled itself the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, after which it reverted to Bakhmut. Apparently the current Russian regime just reveres old communists so much that it wants another name change.
Just to be sure, ZaSu, I’m agreeing with everything you said.
The combined GDP of the NATO states is over $30 trillion, Russia’s is one and a half.
So what?
They also have a bigger land mass too.
Ukraine is losing territory to Russia and you bring up GDP as if that matters in this war.
How big is Afghanistan’s GDP?
Is it way smaller than ours?
Report: Avowed Neo-Nazis supplied with US equipment.
Sargeant Miller: “I know nothing … nothing”.
It also means that Zelensky is either not in control of these militias or has sent them.
Zelensky is not in control of anything except collecting more money to fund the corrupt Zelensky neo-Nazi cabal from the Nuland/Kagan cabal.
So what. Nationalists use U.S equipment in Israel all the time. Oh I forgot those are the good nazis not the bad ones.
I’m rather curious how these outfits- despite everyone disavowing control of them- were able to be kitted out with US-made weapons and vehicles. If those didn’t come from a Ukrainian handler, and the US didn’t supply them directly, then it’s entirely possible the vehicles and weapons were either stolen from Ukrainian stocks or purchased through the terrorist hotline for such things. Either way it doesn’t look good for Ukrainian accountability for the largesse the US bestows upon them.
On another note, what’s in it for these clowns? What’s the motivation? If they were truly all in for the Ukraine, shouldn’t they have hit inside Russia a long time ago? Why wait until now? Slow news day or something shiny for the American public to look at instead of the fall of Bakhmut?
” If they were truly all in for the Ukraine, shouldn’t they have hit inside Russia a long time ago? Why wait until now?”
There have been multiple Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory throughout the war — even if we only count the ones admitted to / reported on in Russian state media and assume the attributions to Ukraine are correct. At least two assassinations of public figures, several helicopter attacks on border region fuel depots, and drone attacks on bases up to and including the Kremlin itself.
So the clown and neo-Nazis are in charge in Ukraine? Nuland lost control? Of course the deranged old man in the WH is not in charge. sounds like a big mess, the right hand does not know what the left hand does, they all tell different stories.
This “Russian” group probably has a token Russians in it. There are plenty of candidates. Ukraine went on an arest soree atching any Russians who evaded draft and charging them with treason. Then a choice. Be executed for treason , or join “Volunteers”. Otherwise, there is no explanation for joining Azov.
It seems to me that Ukraine is trying to keep alive the Azov brand. In their image obsessed world Azov’s last stand in Mariupol was glorious, and needs to be kept alive. I give them crediit for finding Russian Nazis, it is not an easy task, More will be found in the future, once the word gets around that Americans are paying. Who else, Ukraine has no money of their own.
I’d like to volunteer Matthew Millers first born son as the first draft candidate should this war escalate due to their recklessness.
Todays Nazis do make strange bedfellows. While it was a pointless effort, they did prove to Russia their land mass makes it possible to cause these skirmishes in the future to redirect their focus from the frontline.
From what I understand a few of them are now Russian owned.
What were they targeting exactly?… all these Articles fail to make any mention of it..
It was a terror attack on the local population.
That’s certainly what it sounds like from the accounts I’ve read.
Is that how you characterized the Russian incursion towards Kyiv? Just asking because I seem to remember that you called that a Russian feint to wrongfoot the Ukrainians in the south – i.e. at the very least ‘justified terror’?
The Russian Federation intervention is to protect the ethnic Russians in the Donbass from mass murder and to DeNazify the country.
Sure only the number of people killed in the Donbas was at its all time low
https://ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Conflict-related%20civilian%20casualties%20as%20of%2031%20December%202021%20%28rev%2027%20January%202022%29%20corr%20EN_0.pdf
So Putin’s rescue mission caused the death of several orders of magnitude more ethnic Russians than even a decade of the kind of slaughter you/Putin claims they were exposed to from the Ukrainians.
And pay attention the casualty figures are for both sides and many of them are from mines so often legacy of a more violent past.
So the mass murderer is Putin if we measure by deaths caused by the hostilities before and after February 2022.
Given the number of neo-Nazis in Russia I expect that their DeNAzify campaign will have as great results.
The Russian Federation intervention is to protect the ethnic Russians in the Donbass from mass murder and to DeNazify the country.
It was the OSCE that monitored the region. But why let facts get in the way.
MOSCOW, Feb 19 (Reuters) – Two regions in eastern Ukraine where government and separatist forces have been fighting since 2014 were hit by more than 1,400 explosions on Friday, monitors for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) said, pointing to a surge in shelling.
The OSCE recorded massive increase in shelling by Ukraine prior to the Russian intervention. Ukraine had massed forces on the frontline and were about to attack.
Indeed, so here you are the same story told by the OSCE report
https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/f/b/469734.pdf
Yes indeed when the Russians were about to move in and had been building up forces near the Ukrainian border for more than 6 months – surprise – surprise the Ukrainians started shelling to forestall the invasion – it is pretty standard in battles (which was what was already going on in the Donbas) so using this as the justification just shows you how hollow this is.
Simply put this is just a lie – there is no evidence that the Ukrainians started the build up of forces and none that would have supported an attack across the line of control.
They did not have the offensive weapons to do so – it took the Russians months to cross that line and they had the tanks and artillery to do so.
Some stories feature the groups claiming to have “liberated” several villages.
I strongly suspect that the people there weren’t interested in being “liberated,” even if that was the goal, though.
They were targeting civilians……they were doing what throughout history western armies have done when defeated, murder as many civilians as they can.
Biden is funding those militias & says Putin is the bad guy. Biden is continuing his wars in Syria & Iraq & secretly doing things the MSM won’t tell you about. He caused the war in Ukraine to happen although the US is not directly fighting in the war. Russia did not cause any of the wars the US is fighting.
“Nine people were hospitalized following drone attacks on Belgorod overnight, its governor Vyacheslav Gladkov said Wednesday, adding that it was “not a calm night” in the southwestern Russian region. The drone attacks followed the earlier incursion claimed by the Freedom for Russia Legion and another group, the Russian Volunteer Corps.” – CNN
This looks like a big nothingburger compared to what the neo-Nazis did in Odessa and the Donbas back in 2014. It hardly deserves retaliation. Maybe it will be “not a calm night” in Kiev.
We won’t hear about this in the MSM. The US says people that disagree with it are Putin Apologists or unpatriotic. They won’t say the Russian Nazis fighting on Ukraine’s side are unpatriotic. People defending the USA’s & Ukraine’s position say Putin is like Hitler & call him “Putler” Putin-Hitler.
Russia is fighting Nazis in Ukraine & the West is supporting Nazis in Ukraine. If they take over Ukraine, they’ll send Zelensky, other Jews & other people they despise to concentration camps.
“Neo-Nazi Militia Used US Armored Vehicles in Attack on Russia’s Belgorod Region”
Just like F-16s, MRAPs, and Humvees are just plain old weapons of war. They are not Wunderwaffe (wonder-weapons) that are any more survivable then any other weapon. Made in America does not really matter to Russian FAB500 1000 and 3000 pound bombs.
In fact, an F-16 is not any more impervious to S300, S350, S400 SAMS.
Bidet, DEMaligNancy and Chuckie the $chum are therefore U.卐.’ neo-Nazi collaborators !