I normally like Tracey but calling the Kerch bridge attack a "terror bombing" is retarded. Trolling the Regime is fine but don't do it as the expense of your own credibility.
How was it NOT a terror attack? It was an attack on civilian infrastructure far away from the war zone. It was done because of the symbolic meaningfulness of the bridge (uniting Russian with Crimea). It was clearly a terror attack, just like the Dugin assassination.
It was a legimate military target, as that bridge was supplying the entire Russian army on the southern front. Meanwhile, Russia targeted a pedestrian bridge(and missed), a playground, and some random cars in the street in Kiev. Those had no military objective or use. Does this mean, using your definition, Russia committed a terrorist attack?
Well, they also attacked thermal power plants and electricity relay stations and such. (Not for the first time, and got hit back the same way just today.)
Yes it is you dickless dipshit. It was an attack
on civilian infrastructure without strategic importance to the war effort that served only to terrorize and demoralize Russians by hitting a symbol of putin’s reunification of crimea and Russia. How about you shut the fuck up so you don’t look any more retarded than you already do, you pathetic intellectual lightweight?
International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored). - FBI
Violent, criminal acts (VBIED attack on a civilian bridge) committed by individuals and/or groups (Ukrainian SBU) inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (Ukraine).
Terror attacks are attacks against civilians, not "civilian infrastructure". And it isn't "civilian infrastructure", it's dual use - it's the only route of military supply to the southern front that isn't under Ukrainian fire control. Also, it wasn't a truck bomb, that's just the excuse they're using to conceal the fact that they gave Ukraine ATACMS. Same excuse was used for the Saki airbase bombing.
So, since you still talk about it, will you answerto me and tell me whose lies did you so readily believe about "the SBU office hit" that you decided to publicly repeat without any sort of evidence whatsoever?
I'm not even tell you to stop believe the liars, it's your choice to be stupid, I just need to know the source of your stuff. (It's a bad shit.)
So, since you still talk about it, will you answerto me and tell me whose lies did you so readily believe about "the SBU office hit" that you decided to publicly repeat without any sort of evidence whatsoever?
Are you offended that I thought the SBU was hit? Or do you think it's some sort of great gotcha? If it wasn't hit, it underlines my point even more - how on earth they're not even hitting the SBU 9 months in.
I'm not even tell you to stop believe the liars, it's your choice to be stupid, I just need to know the source of your stuff. (It's a bad shit.)
No doubt anything is going to be "bad shit" to someone who believes anything that's anti-Russian. I follow a lot of accounts but also take them with a grain of salt, same as the corrupt Western media. You should do the same and familiarize yourself with that grand old concept of the "fog of war".
I'm offended by your guilible naive stupidty where you continue to ever believe the lies by liars just because they tell you things. I don't know why, but you be you.
Answer to you question: They're using Soviet missiles. (And cheap Iranian "martyr" drones, that have extreme range and good bang for the price but use the same guidance system as the V2 rocket.)
Just tell me who lied to you. I won't hurt them, I promise.
I normally like Tracey but calling the Kerch bridge attack a "terror bombing" is retarded. Trolling the Regime is fine but don't do it as the expense of your own credibility.
How was it NOT a terror attack? It was an attack on civilian infrastructure far away from the war zone. It was done because of the symbolic meaningfulness of the bridge (uniting Russian with Crimea). It was clearly a terror attack, just like the Dugin assassination.
It was carried out with improvised explosives, legit military attacks use real weapons.
It was a legimate military target, as that bridge was supplying the entire Russian army on the southern front. Meanwhile, Russia targeted a pedestrian bridge(and missed), a playground, and some random cars in the street in Kiev. Those had no military objective or use. Does this mean, using your definition, Russia committed a terrorist attack?
Well, they also attacked thermal power plants and electricity relay stations and such. (Not for the first time, and got hit back the same way just today.)
That's not what a "terror attack" is you retard. You're all regurgitating the same drivel, which means you're all imbibing the same propaganda.
Yes it is you dickless dipshit. It was an attack on civilian infrastructure without strategic importance to the war effort that served only to terrorize and demoralize Russians by hitting a symbol of putin’s reunification of crimea and Russia. How about you shut the fuck up so you don’t look any more retarded than you already do, you pathetic intellectual lightweight?
Pretending that there are rules in war is silly. Civilian? Military? All is enemy.
Violent, criminal acts (VBIED attack on a civilian bridge) committed by individuals and/or groups (Ukrainian SBU) inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (Ukraine).
Nothing criminal about smashing invading Russians and their bridge. Try again, this time maybe try shoving the boot all the way into your throat.
How is it fucking not? A truck bomb on civilian infrastructure.
Terror attacks are attacks against civilians, not "civilian infrastructure". And it isn't "civilian infrastructure", it's dual use - it's the only route of military supply to the southern front that isn't under Ukrainian fire control. Also, it wasn't a truck bomb, that's just the excuse they're using to conceal the fact that they gave Ukraine ATACMS. Same excuse was used for the Saki airbase bombing.
And civilians were killed… so where’s your argument again?
Up his ass, where he keeps the rest of his pedantic faggotry.
The original Russian announcement was that "no one was injured".
Just like when their airbase exploded.
See if your 8 brain cells can work out the difference between these sentences.
Kill yourself faggot
'Terror bombing' would be bombing to instill fear in the population.
This was more of a terrorist bombing. At the very least, they used the same tactics as ISIS.
So, since you still talk about it, will you answerto me and tell me whose lies did you so readily believe about "the SBU office hit" that you decided to publicly repeat without any sort of evidence whatsoever?
I'm not even tell you to stop believe the liars, it's your choice to be stupid, I just need to know the source of your stuff. (It's a bad shit.)
Are you offended that I thought the SBU was hit? Or do you think it's some sort of great gotcha? If it wasn't hit, it underlines my point even more - how on earth they're not even hitting the SBU 9 months in.
No doubt anything is going to be "bad shit" to someone who believes anything that's anti-Russian. I follow a lot of accounts but also take them with a grain of salt, same as the corrupt Western media. You should do the same and familiarize yourself with that grand old concept of the "fog of war".
I'm offended by your guilible naive stupidty where you continue to ever believe the lies by liars just because they tell you things. I don't know why, but you be you.
Answer to you question: They're using Soviet missiles. (And cheap Iranian "martyr" drones, that have extreme range and good bang for the price but use the same guidance system as the V2 rocket.)
Just tell me who lied to you. I won't hurt them, I promise.