By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A Ukrainian strike reportedly targeted the headquarters of Russia’s 35th Separate Guards Motor Rifle Brigade in the occupied city of Selydove, resulting in the deaths of numerous commanders. Unverified drone footage and social media posts from both Ukrainian and pro-Russian sources corroborate the attack, with some suggesting a U.S.-supplied HIMARS system was used. The strike, if confirmed, would significantly hinder Russia’s ongoing offensive towards Pokrovsk in the Donetsk region. While the Russian Ministry of Defense has yet to comment, the incident underscores the ongoing intense fighting in the area.
Read the original article here
HIMARS Strike ‘Eliminated’ Entire Russian Command Post in Ukraine: A Deep Dive
A recent HIMARS strike in Ukraine reportedly eliminated an entire Russian command post. This is significant, not just for the immediate tactical advantage it grants Ukraine, but also for the broader implications on the war effort. The sheer effectiveness of the strike, described as “maximum bang for the buck,” suggests a precise and devastating blow to Russian military leadership. This could severely cripple Russian operational capabilities in the affected area.
The absence of commanding officers creates a major problem for the Russian army, a stark contrast to how Western militaries would handle such a situation. In Western forces, a clear succession plan would ensure continued leadership and operational continuity. However, the Russian military’s reported lack of adequately trained non-commissioned officers (NCOs) capable of assuming leadership roles leaves a significant void, leading to potential disorganization and paralysis at the tactical level. The success of the strike, therefore, underscores a potential vulnerability in the Russian chain of command.
The scale of the damage has raised questions about the exact nature of the weaponry used. Some speculate that it wasn’t a typical HIMARS strike but something more akin to a bunker-buster, given descriptions of a “largely vertical blast column.” This possibility opens the door for further analysis of the employed ordnance and its potential to neutralize hardened targets. Regardless of the specific munition used, the outcome is striking. The complete decimation of the command post serves as a potent symbol of Ukraine’s growing military capability.
The news has understandably generated excitement among supporters of Ukraine. The strike is seen by many as a crucial victory, potentially tipping the scales of the conflict. The potential for cascading effects on Russian operations is considerable. The elimination of a significant number of high-ranking officers not only disrupts immediate command structures but could also impact morale across wider units. The impact extends beyond immediate military gains; some observers believe that continued successful strikes like this could contribute to the long-term erosion of Russian military power and even hasten the collapse of the regime.
The aftermath of the strike is also fueling speculation about the future of the war. While celebrating the military success, many acknowledge the immense challenges that still lie ahead for Ukraine. Fighting against a large nation fully committed to a wartime economy is a daunting task. The ongoing conflict highlights the complexities of the situation and the necessity for continued international support.
The narrative surrounding the strike isn’t without its complexities. The claim of complete elimination, while compelling, highlights the crucial need for careful verification of information. The lack of readily available, independent visual confirmation underscores the importance of critical thinking and a balanced approach to assessing military reports during wartime. In the absence of official confirmation and corroborating visual evidence, caution is warranted.
Despite the uncertainty, the event serves as a strong reminder of the significant role of precision-guided munitions in modern warfare and the potential for high-impact strikes to significantly alter the course of a military campaign. It also sheds light on the organizational weaknesses within the Russian military, highlighting their vulnerability to well-executed attacks targeting key leadership elements.
The widespread discussion about the strike has also prompted conversations about the broader geopolitical implications of the conflict. The war’s impact extends beyond the battlefield, influencing global politics and fostering anxieties about the rise of extremist ideologies. The hope is that the continued success of the Ukrainian military will eventually lead to a peaceful resolution.
The details surrounding this particular strike, while potentially exaggerated or lacking full verification in the short term, showcase the capacity for precise, high-impact strikes to significantly disrupt the enemy’s operational capabilities. The potential for future similar operations holds significant implications for the continued trajectory of the conflict, raising fundamental questions about the future stability of the Russian military and the possibility of a more decisive end to the war. The impact extends far beyond the immediate battlefield, influencing the global political landscape and the perceptions of various actors involved. This single event, while subject to further scrutiny and confirmation, serves as a potent symbol of the changing dynamics in the conflict.