“Evidence currently points to a Ukrainian strike because…”

[Most likely conclusion is “technical malfunction” of Ukrainian strike. Less likely, deliberate Ukrainian false flag. The analysis below is worth reading. ABN]

#KRAMATORSK – A lot of debate about responsibility for the tragedy. My earlier Tweet was published after referring to several sources – Russian, Ukrainian and US – and based on the best possible information available. That evidence currently points to a Ukrainian strike because…

1. The trajectory of the missile. A missile’s tail falls before the head, therefore it is possible to project the trajectory of the missile, which I illustrate below. The rocket approached #Kramatorsk from slightly south of west. That area is under full control of the UAF.

2. Of the two combatants, only the Ukrainian army still uses #Tochka_U missile system; this was confirmed by pro-Ukrainian sources. Yes, Russia has some in its inventory, but they were retired after transition to the #Iskander in 2019 was completed.

To the geniuses, posting the same videos over and over: Yes, 🇷🇺 and 🇧🇾 – a current operator of the Tochkas – used the missile during training earlier this winter, but it hasn’t been used once by 🇷🇺 in the past 44 days. And the BAZ vehicles have multiple uses, including radar.

3. Finally, there is no counter-evidence offered by 🇺🇦, US or NATO. Repeating “Russia also has Tochkas,” “we assess it was likely Russia” and “what motive does Ukraine have” is not evidence. And evidence is easy to provide, as @RealScottRitter points out.

Speaking of motivation, the case for a Russian strike boils down to “Putin is a monster.” If that’s all you need, “go forth and prosper.”

The two predominant explanations for Ukrainian strike are:
1. False flag, as claimed by Russia’s MOD.
2. Technical malfunction.

I lean more towards the latter. At the end of the day, the Ukrainian army uses dated Soviet technology, which has the propensity to malfunction and has throughout the conflict. The original reactions from #Kiev also suggest support this theory.

After the strike, #Zelensky's military advisor claimed the missile was a Russian #Iskander, which set off a messy campaign to put the entire episode into an acceptable context, which likely suggests no one was prepared for something like this.

Originally tweeted by Serge (@SergeRousskikh) on April 8, 2022.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s