By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A fire broke out at the Afipsky Oil Refinery in Russia’s Krasnodar Krai on June 11 following a Ukrainian strike. Ukrainian forces confirmed a successful strike on the facility, which is a major oil processing plant in southern Russia. While authorities claimed the fire was caused by falling drone debris, residents reported explosions and air defense activity. The fire was eventually extinguished, but the broader attack across Krasnodar Krai resulted in three injuries and damage to residential areas.
Read the original article here
It’s quite striking to see a major oil refinery in southern Russia go up in flames, a significant event unfolding after what is being described as a Ukrainian attack. This incident really brings into focus how dramatically the conflict has evolved. When this military operation began, it was initially presented as a swift endeavor, but it has now stretched on for a considerable period. The fact that the war has now surpassed the duration of World War I is a sobering thought, marking a truly unprecedented phase in modern history.
The narrative around “demilitarization” of Ukraine seems increasingly ironic when we observe strikes like this, which are now occurring with a frequency and capability that many might have initially deemed outside Ukraine’s purview. These actions are, in a sense, demonstrating a potent assertion of national capability, perhaps illustrating that in the age of strong nationalistic sentiments, imperialistic ambitions often prove to be a non-starter. The reliance Russia has on its oil revenue makes these kinds of attacks on its energy infrastructure particularly poignant and undoubtedly a source of immense frustration for them.
It’s not hard to imagine the sentiment of determination and the feeling of seeing some positive developments, even amidst such a challenging global situation, for those supporting Ukraine. The notion that this is a “hot hit news” for the day, as some might put it, speaks to the ongoing nature of these events. Of course, there’s always the cynical take, suggesting a “controlled demolition” or even attributing the attacks to external actors like the USA, perhaps as a way to deflect from the reality of Ukrainian agency. The idea that a direct response might be leveled against the USA is certainly a provocative one, highlighting the escalating tensions.
The comparison of the current conflict’s length to World War I is indeed eye-opening. It appears the threshold for surpassing that historical conflict was crossed very recently, a grim milestone. In this context, Ukraine seems to be effectively leveraging a current advantage, catching Russia somewhat off guard with its drone capabilities, which appear to be faring well against what has been described as minimal defense against them thus far.
There are reports from Ukrainian drone operators themselves, conveying a sense of almost unimpeded access, as if they are operating within Russian territory as a matter of routine. The image of Russia resorting to stationing individuals with shotguns along critical roadways every fifty meters to combat drones paints a rather stark picture of their defensive struggles. It really underscores the difficulty Russia is facing in even achieving its stated objectives against a neighboring country, especially one it underestimated. The idea that a direct confrontation with a power like America would lead to a complete redrawing of Russia’s topographical maps is a powerful statement about relative military strength, and it’s understandable why some might dismiss alternative explanations for these attacks as mere “copes.”
The frustration of having to accept Ukraine’s successes must be immense, leading some to seek alternative explanations. The notion that Ukraine is “ramming Russia up the ass,” as it’s colloquially put, might be difficult for some to digest, prompting them to invent scenarios where a stronger power is secretly orchestrating these events. This perspective often overlooks the more straightforward, and perhaps more politically charged, reality of Ukraine’s evolving military prowess and determination. The assertion that America’s president is famously “very pro-Russia” also seems to fly in the face of much of the public discourse and action, adding another layer to these differing interpretations.
For those who might feel embarrassed by Russia’s performance in this conflict, it’s important to remember that, at least from a certain perspective, NATO has not yet fully engaged its capabilities. The mention of Article 5, the mutual defense clause of NATO, serves as a reminder of the potential for wider involvement should certain thresholds be crossed, even if it hasn’t been activated yet. The historical data itself is quite compelling when looking at the duration of past major conflicts. World War I, officially starting in 1914 and concluding in 1919, lasted approximately 1,566 days. The current phase of the Russian invasion, beginning in February 2022, has already surpassed that mark, reaching around 1,569 days. For context, World War II in Europe concluded after 2,076 days, and the overall end of WWII in the Pacific was after 2,193 days.
While the activation of drones by entities like “Skynet” might raise concerns about the broader implications, the strategic objective of diverting Russian resources to defend against them is clearly seen as a victory for Ukraine. The world often associates World War I not just with its duration but with its sheer horror and immense scale, marked by millions of deaths and widespread maiming. The conditions during that war were arguably some of the worst in history, with static lines, rampant disease, and severe shortages of basic necessities. Furthermore, World War I is often viewed as a precursor to World War II, which was even more devastating in terms of human cost, resulting in tens of millions of deaths. The contrasting imagery of little babies being bad at fighting and wanting to burn the world down, alongside terms like “snowflakes,” highlights the deeply emotional and often polarized reactions to the complexities of war.