By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Overnight on August 2nd, industrial facilities across several Russian regions, including Ryazan, Penza, Samara, and Voronezh oblasts, were targeted in a series of drone attacks, as confirmed by Ukraine’s General Staff. Oil refineries in Ryazan and Samara, as well as the Elektropribor plant in Penza, were reportedly struck, causing fires and damage. Additionally, a fuel storage base in Voronezh Oblast and the Primorsko-Akhtarsk military airfield in Krasnodar Krai, used for Shahed drone storage and launch facilities, were also targeted by Ukrainian drones, the latter attack claimed by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU). These attacks were reportedly a response to recent Russian strikes on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure.
Read the original article here
Drone strikes hit industrial sites in several Russian regions, and honestly, it’s something of a relief to see this shift in focus. For a while, it felt like the conflict was relentlessly targeting civilians and their homes, a grim reality that underscored the brutality of the war. The news of these strikes hitting critical infrastructure, like industrial sites, feels different. It suggests a strategic evolution, a move towards targeting the machinery that fuels the Russian war machine.
Seeing this shift, it’s understandable to feel a certain satisfaction. When you see strikes focused on supporting the “special operation,” like railways, bridges, and dams, it’s impossible not to acknowledge the potential impact on the Russian military’s capabilities. It could force them to divert resources, personnel, and equipment away from the front lines, effectively applying pressure in a new way. This strategy, which targets the war’s infrastructure rather than civilian life, is definitely the kind of evolution everyone was hoping for.
The fact that these attacks are happening at all raises some interesting points. It’s a bit shocking to consider that after three years, some Russian oil refineries are still operational. One has to wonder why these targets weren’t hit sooner. It makes you think about the level of resources and support being given to Ukraine. It’s almost as if it’s been a deliberate choice to allow them to continue operating, potentially for economic reasons.
The potential economic ramifications of these strikes are, well, complex. Attacking oil production, for instance, is a double-edged sword. While it hurts Russia, it also has the potential to raise global prices, creating some uncomfortable dynamics for world leaders. The ideal would be to strike at areas that minimize the damage to the global markets, like storage and finishing facilities. If they really wanted to, they could hit everything and shut down the entire industry.
The contrast in the response to these strikes versus Russia’s attacks on civilian targets is stark and understandable. When attacks target the war effort, it’s seen as a legitimate tactic. Russia seems to follow a motto of “let’s use our relatively limited arsenal of weapons to attack whatever moves.” Most people see Russia as the aggressor, and therefore any strike on their military and industrial targets are justified.
It’s pretty clear that the Ukrainian attacks are on military targets, while Russia exclusively attacks civilians. It is also true that civilians will die in war. But the fact remains that this war was entirely unprovoked.
The moral distinction here is pretty clear. It’s not a case of “both sides” doing the same thing. There’s a world of difference between attacking industrial sites that support a war and deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure and people. The fact that one side is the clear aggressor, and that the war began as an invasion, makes all the difference in how these attacks are viewed.