Nuclear strike? Chemical attack? What dirty trick is Putin preparing?

Over the past week, there have been several major provocations against Ukraine that have specific goals. What exactly are Putin’s goals? What can you expect from a psychopath with a nuclear weapon? Let’s try to figure it out.

Attack on Yelenovka

On the night of July 28-29, three explosions thundered in the camp of prisoners of war of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. As a result of the explosions, 52 Ukrainian prisoners of war were killed and more than 100 were injured, most of them belonged to the Azov regiment. The camp guards and staff were not injured.

The Russian side announced that Ukraine had fired HIMARS missiles at a prisoner of war camp in Yelenovka and even demonstrated fragments of a HIMARS missile.

At the same time, it became known from the radio intercepts of the SBU that 2 days before that, the captured ‘Azovites’ were transferred to a separate barracks in the industrial zone of the Yelenovka prison. It was this barrack that became the target of the attack.

Ukraine denies any involvement in the Yelenovka bombings, rightly blaming Russia for the deaths of the Azov POWs.

HIMARS munitions are GPS guided missiles and each arrival is recorded by a computer system as well as the serial number of the projectile. The operator at any time can provide information about which projectile hit the target and with what serial number this projectile was.
Thus, it is impossible to simply transfer the fragments of the HIMARS rocket to another place. This will be immediately clear as soon as the serial number of the projectile is found.

‘Oscilloscope needle’ Yulia Latynina in this regard quite accurately noted:

There was a mass murder of prisoners of war in the concentration camp. You don’t have to ask the guards about it.

Motives for the crime

In this regard, we ask the question about the motives of this crime.
Did the government of Ukraine have a motive for this step? Why kill your soldiers, even prisoners? To cause indignation and discontent of relatives? For the wives and mothers of the dead to besiege the office of the President of Ukraine?

Rhetorical questions after which it becomes clear that Ukraine had no motives to carry out this attack.

Was there a motive for Russia to kill the prisoners of war of ‘Azov’?
The defenders of the Azovstal plant were spared only thanks to international pressure on Putin. ‘Azov’ surrendered under the guarantees of the International Red Cross. They expected to stay alive.

At the same time, Russian propaganda inflated the topic of the execution of prisoners of war ‘Azov’, but then suddenly everything stopped.

Russian propaganda presented the fighters of ‘Azov’ as ‘Fascists’ and ‘Nazis’ who needed to be crushed like rabid rats.

However, the intervention of international organizations cast doubt on these bloody plans.

Thus, Russia found itself in a stalemate with the prisoners of “Azov”
Indeed, in this case, it will be necessary to tell the citizens of Russia, who would begin to ask the question: “How is it that you killed that Azov were Nazis, and now you are exchanging them for our prisoners of war?”

However, the accidental death of Azov POWs helped resolve this uneasy flexibility. In such cases, answering the question about Russia’s motives, we can say with confidence that Russia certainly had a motive for killing the Azov prisoners of war.

Attack on Sevastopol

On July 31, the governor of Sevastopol, Mikhail Razvozzhaev, reported that at about 5 a.m., a Ukrainian UAV attacked the building of the headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet. According to him, 4 people received minor injuries, two of moderate severity, but no one was killed.

Glass in the building was shattered and there was minor damage to the exterior.

The ‘Ukrainian drone’ flew 260 km, hiding from Russian air defenses and struck at the courtyard of the Navy headquarters. The UAV missed the building of the headquarters of the Navy. Force yourself to believe it.

In this regard, questions arise:

1. How could a Ukrainian UAV strike at the headquarters of the Navy in Sevastopol if the front is 260 km away, and the maximum range of the Switchblade kamikaze drone is only 40 km?
2. Why didn’t the Russian air defense stop the drone attack if it was the Bayraktar TB-2 UAV?

We, apparently, will not hear the answers to these questions.

Watch your hands, now there will be a focus

On July 5, the pro-Russian Telegram channel ‘Nezygar’ published an interesting message. Here is a short excerpt from it:

The first target [AFU] is the Crimean Bridge, but this is the most unlikely operation, since the Crimea is closed by echeloned S 400 systems and a number of new air defense systems, and then the newest S 500 division.

The second target is a prisoner of war camp in the village of Yelenovka, where the Nazis from Azovstal and the military personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are located.

The British want to frame the MLRS strike as an attempt by the Russian Armed Forces to hide “the execution and torture of prisoners, and then hype Buchi’s temnik.”

The third goal is Sevastopol, the city center or the base of the Black Sea Fleet is being discussed.

As the events of the past week show, propagandists from ‘Nezygar’ correctly “predicted” two out of three target:

• Attack on the prisoner of war camp in Yelenovka
• Attack on the headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet of the Navy in Sevastopol

And what about the supposedly first goal of the Armed Forces of Ukraine – the Crimean bridge? Crimean bridge in place. While in place. Moreover, it is not at all an easy task to strike at the Crimean bridge from the territory of Ukraine, since, as Nezygar himself admits, the bridge is covered by “layered S 400 systems and a number of new air defense systems.”

It is rather difficult to accuse Ukraine of launching a missile strike on the Crimean bridge (although many Ukrainians are looking forward to this strike from the Ukrainian Armed Forces).

Instead of hitting the Crimean bridge, plan “B” was activated – the center of Donetsk was shelled with cluster munitions with PFM-1 ‘Petal’ mines.

Mines PFM-1 have low power and are difficult to notice, especially in the grass and on the rocks. Such mines are used, among other things, for remote mining.

Who came up with the idea to scatter mines in the city center is unknown, but the DPR authorities blame Ukraine for this.

Deja vu. The methods are the same

It seems like something like this has already happened. In mid-February, Russian media published several materials highlighting Ukraine’s aggressive attitude towards Russia and the DNR/LNR.

Cars exploded, gas stations burned, ‘the territory of the DPR was shelled’, ‘Ukrainian saboteurs’ were detained.

All these fakes were exposed, which, however, did not prevent the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24 this year.

Following the provocations, a large-scale ‘military special operation’ began.

What to expect from Putin now?

There is no doubt that something more grandiose than missile duels or tactical maneuvers at the front should happen in the wake of the provocative actions against Ukraine last week.

We can only guess what it could be.

The use of nuclear weapons? Hardly.
Putin was repeatedly warned by Western politicians and the military that in the event of the use of nuclear weapons, an indispensable response from the NATO countries would follow.

Moreover. The British government, represented by the then Prime Minister Boris Johnson, stated that if Russia uses nuclear weapons, Britain will symmetrically respond with a nuclear strike against Russia, regardless of NATO’s opinion.

Chemical attack? There is still a small chance for Russia to use chemical weapons, although it is small.

Chemical attack? There is still a small chance for Russia to use chemical weapons, although it is small.

Russia has already tried to use chemical weapons in Mariupol, but received a decent response. The United States will intervene in the conflict if Russia uses chemical weapons.

It is unlikely that Putin will be satisfied if the American ‘Abrams’ begin a victorious march to Tverskaya.

From all this it follows that something massive is being prepared and what exactly we will know only when it happens.
And something will happen soon.

The opinion of the authors of the articles does not always coincide with the opinion of the editors.