Dear Readers:
Today I have this op-ed by Evgeny Pozdnyakov, on the topic of Ukraine’s weekend cluster-bombing of a Crimean tourist beach. But when I say Ukraine, I really mean the United States of America. Their missiles, their planning, their fingers on the button. As readers are probably aware, this was a very tough weekend, this past weekend, for Russia. NATO coordinated several synchronized terror attacks against Russian citizens, not just the Crimea thing, but also reviving their ISIS head-chopper cells in Dagestan to wreak chaos among the peoples of Russia…
Pozdnyakov: After the Ukrainian strike against Sebastopol, Zelensky’s Chief Advisor, Mikhail Podoliak, declared that there is not, and cannot be, such a thing as a “peaceful life” for people living in Crimea. He labelled the residents of the peninsula civilian occupiers (grazhdanskie okkupanty). These people, including the children, are not to be allowed any illusion that there are any safe places for them to be. No tourist zones, no beaches, no “fictitious symbols of peaceful life”, according to this top-ranking member of the Ukrainian regime.
Podoliak went on to justify his war-crimey way of thinking: “Crimea is like a giant military camp. It contains hundreds of direct military targets, which the Russians cynically mask, and use the civilians as human shields. These civilian human shields, by the way, we regard as civilian occupiers.” [yalensis: occupier shields?]
The Russians, for their part, are under no illusions about the American role in the Crimea attack. Podoliak communicated that his Western “partners” gave the go-ahead to strike Crimea, already a year ago. Back in November 2022 he had shared his personal fantasy that soon (after the Ukrainian “victory” in the counter-offensive) he would be sitting in a cafe in Yalta, sipping coffee, and posting a video live from that location.
Well, that didn’t come to pass, but killing random Russians playing on the beach would be a sort of consolation prize for this Nazi. In fact, his statement marks a change of external rhetoric: In the past, Ukrainian officials pretended, for Western public opinion, to believe that the people living in Crimea were “our people, Ukrainians” living under Russian occupation. Now they have dropped that unnecessary mask of piety and speak openly of killing “civilian occupiers”.
In fact, Podoliak has simply caught up with the rhetoric of Ukrainian Nationalists (previously considered more on the fringe) who have always stated that: Крим буде або українським, або безлюдним (“Crimea will be either Ukrainian, or de-populated”). So, now we know they are going with the “depopulated” option.
Currently around 1.9 million people reside in Crimea. Clearly the Ukrainian authorities would like to kill them all, but that’s easier said than done.
Ukrainian political analyst Vladimir Skachko believes that Podoliak’s rhetoric is a type of justification for future, perhaps even larger strikes, against civilians. Ukrainian propagandists will justify the targeting of civilians on the grounds that there is no real difference between civilians and military. In effect, they are giving themselves a carte blanche to do whatever horrible deeds they please. Humans Rights advocate Larisa Shesler agrees: The Ukrainians long ago gave up on winning over the residents of Donbass and Crimea. “Our enemy is conducting this war not for people or territory, but simply to exterminate Russians and destroy Russia. This is why Podoliak speaks of civilian occupiers. The fact is, even among countries which support Ukraine, the use of cluster bombs against the peaceful population arouses some consternation. And this is why they are loudly trying to justify this. Pretending that they are striking legitimate targets instead of just peaceful civilians.”
Awful Avalanche 
Still haven’t seen any evidence that the missile was targeted at a beach. Rather it seems there was a military target and either it was brought down by air defence or it exploded early by accident.
In other words the “deliberately targeted” view is supposition at best.
Of course most “Ukraine civilian victims” are this exactly, victims of their own air Defence rare successes.
I’m not arguing that such an act is beyond Ukraine. Or that US associates were certainly involved. Or even that US associates haven’t been involved in clearer cases of outright terrorism targeting civilians in pre 2014 Russia.
Just that building accurate theories on false facts is not the way to argue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with you that the beach may not necessarily have been deliberately targeted. It just might be that the nazis were aiming for Belbek air base a couple miles up the coast, and the missile went astray because it was hit by Russian air defenses.
But there’s an argument to be made that when you attack military targets with weapons by their very nature likely to go astray and hit civilians, and when further, you do so with bespoke antipersonnel cluster munitions of questionable legality, then your proclaimed intentions don’t matter and you’re still a war criminal. It’s a variant of this logic that Kiev and its western backers have exploited since the beginning, by attributing every last Ukrainian civilian death to ‘Russian targeting.’ In fact, of course, it has been Kiev, since the beginning, that most aggressively deployed its forces behind civilian ‘human shields’ – at schools, hospitals and shopping malls.
I would be tempted, in this instance, to reserve judgment, if Kiev had issued immediate and forceful regrets that they missed their target and killed civilians by mistake. Instead we get Podoliak arguing, in effect, that genocide against ‘civilian occupiers’ is justified. I would argue that his words have post facto condemned not just the ATACMs crew and its chain of command to war crimes tribunals, but Podoliak himself alongside them. Let’s not forget the American troops who handled the ‘targeting package,’ or the US officials who authorized the ATACMs transfer. I look forward to short-drop hangings with lots of kicking and twisting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I read some analysts who argue that the Belbek air base was not even being used much any more, so there would have been no reason for the Ukrainians to target it with 5 ATACMS armed with cluster bombs. I don’t know what’s true.
You are right, though, that Podoliak’s words condemn him and the Kiev regime. Like, they could have said, “oops, we were targeting a legitimate military target, but some of the cluster bombs went astray, and others were knocked off course by Russian air defense.” Instead, they went with, “All Russian residents of Crimea are legitimate targets.”
That, combined with the synchronized terror attack in Dagestan, makes me believe that, yes, the Ukrainians were going after civilians on this particular Sunday on the beach.
It’s just a hunch, I obviously can’t prove it. The purpose would be to scare away tourists and thus harm the Crimean economy. Oh, and of course, to encourage the Russian people to overthrow Putin!
LikeLike
I have watched a video analysing what happened and the beach in question lies past the airbase. The missile had to pass near or almost over the base to get to the beach as was shown on a map and likely missile trajectories.
LikeLike
Largely agree, with a but.
If you were to swap a few words from what Podoliak said, you’d have a statement that could’ve been made by an arch-zionist in its eradication of any distinction between civilian and military. Zelensky did offer up Ukraine as an Israel of Eastern Europe, let’s recall. So even if the target was a military installation rather than a beach or—as some say the missile trajectories indicate—a central cathedral on a religious holiday, Podoliak openly says there are no innocents, which is as much to say that nothing Ukraine does can be considered terrorism. Convenient for them. Western governments won’t come right out with such statements—the U.S. expresses “regrets,” then changes the subject to blame the Russians; the Europeans turn a blind eye and ban “disinformation,” a.k.a. reporting or analysis—but by their actions, and inaction, they show who they are: it’s not terrorism if we—er, Ukraine, Israel, etc.—do it, but if they (Russians, Hamas, etc.) pull a child from the rubble, it’s a crime against humanity! All to say the facts of this case are ambiguous, agreed, but the brutal entitlement and hypocrisy of Ukraine and its backers are plain to see.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Excellent comment. This is what I was trying to say, but you said it better.
The comparison with Israel is also good. I was reading that Yoav Gallant (Israeli Defense Minister) started softening his rhetoric a bit under Biden’s tutelage, piously declaiming that “we don’t want to hurt innocent Palestinians.” Meanwhile, weeks earlier he deemed Palestinians as “human animals” and made it clear that the Zionists would love to exterminate every single one of them from the planet.
Similarly, NATO/Ukraine would love to exterminate Russians, and Podoliak pretty much said that. Unlike Gallant, though, I doubt if he will be forced to soften his rhetoric.
LikeLike
I think there is bit more culpability than you suggest Michael,
US-Army personal controlled ATACM missile, which developed it’s flight path from the US-Air-Force acquired intel. The flight path was trying to evade radar interception by routing over a civilian areas that were filled with holiday beach goers. The US-Army controllers knew the substantial risks and undertook them anyway.
Additionally, the missile’s controllers chose to disperse the vehicles bomblets after it had lost controlled flight but prior to terminating it’s flight into terrain, [which was over water], in a desperate attempt to cause carnage. The controllers knew where the missile was and is so often the case where the 3LAs are involved, “plausible deniability” was the operative fig leaf meant to obscure the obscenity.
These missiles are called Ballistic missiles but, that is a misnomer, they’re highly maneuverable, highly controllable. Assuming the whole mission wasn’t a war crime from the start, the person who chose to disperse the bomblets over the beach is a war criminal and by concealing the crime, so too those who aided and abetted the crime. Fortunately, by God’s good grace, the bomblets were released, too high and just slightly too far offshore or, the civilian deaths would have been in the hundreds.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This is going to sound horribly callous, but the Ukrainians are actually “wasting” these expensive bombs on civilians. From a cold-blooded practical point of view, such weapons should be conserved and used only on valuable (military) targets. Better to use them against soldiers. You kill 15 civilians, whoop-de-doo, what was that, like waste another billion dollars that you’ll never get back?
LikeLike
Without having definitive proof I trend towards Ron Paul’s explanation of the motive behind this heinous attack…it was meant by Team-Biden as a provocation to inflame the war to the point where it could not be extinguished by his successor…whoever that might be. So yeah, if the the plan fails, they did “waste” their ammo but, if the plan succeeds and Ukrainia is the start of a new World-World-War…well…then it was “money well spent”
LikeLike
It would not be out of line to imagine that, to Team Biden, the ideal circumstance would be to toss the keys to Trump at 12:00am on the 20th while the missiles are literally arcing toward Moscow.
LikeLike
While Hillary and Haley’s most passionate desire is to be a “wartime” Prez…Trump, for all his failings, is not particularly fond of war. While Trump does idolize the military and…the rank & file of the military [enlisted/NCOs/officers] requite this affection it is not shared by the uppermost echelons of the flag ranks. No,not by a long shot..as we saw with Trump trying to shut down the 3LAs “escapade” in Syria, the brass said “yes Sir” but, continued on as if Obama was still in charge. The US still has about 2,000 combat troops in Syria.
No, those generals, those with DC connections, have high hopes of one day drinking from the great trough of the MIC and they are Biden/Hillary/Cheney/Obama supporters through & through.
So, “it would not be out of line to imagine Team Biden, tossing the keys to [whomever] while the missiles are literally arcing toward Moscow”.
LikeLike
Maybe Biden also toss the nuclear football to Trump as they switch places in front of the White House. And Trump grab da football, and, like “Spiked it! Yeh!”
And then do elaborate victory dance at the end zone for the next 10 minutes until…
LikeLike
Personal theory is that the various elites think they will benefit the most by having the US *out* of NATO, and NATO thus free for a “limited” nuclear war without concerns that the US gets cold feet.
Then the US can serve as a financial and physical safe-haven, from which the elites sweep down to hoover up property at (thermonuclear) fire-sale prices, while tapping the US taxpayer to rebuild Europe. Again.
It’s starting to smell like an unimaginative, yet increasingly plausible, play.
LikeLike
Wow, that’s some sick thinking. But typical of these vampire elites.
LikeLike
@ michaeldroy
I don’t think it matters anymore. It is quite possible that the Ukrainians intended an attack on the air base or that they simply intended a terrorist attack on the Crimea. The fact that they carried out a mass missile attack at a time when there were going to be masses of tourists on the beach, within perhaps 3 to 5 km from the air base, shows a total disregard for casualties.
On the other hand, Ukrainian shelling of Civilian areas of Donetsk and Belgorod shows they are not adverse to attacks on civilians. Combining the casualties on a beach near Sevastopol plus the terrorist attacks in Dagistan does not leave the USA nor Ukraine looking good.
LikeLiked by 2 people
As Simplicius observes today, that air base is not “behind” the beach, it is several kilometers to the side. Thus, for the cluster munitions to disperse on the beach even due to an intercept it would likely have to have been a missile that either a) was in fact targeting civilian gatherings ala Donbass strikes, and/or b) greatly disrupted by ewar such that it was wildly off-course.
But actually it doesn’t matter: Ukraine has “owned” the strike by excusing themselves via branding Russian/Tartar babies in Crimea as “occupiers”. Indeed, based on the quality of their reasoning, figures like Podoliak deserve to get back in the pram. That said, they do in fact damn themselves; it would have been more effective (or at least consistent) to claim Russia shelled the beach with captured ATACMS sub-munitions.
LikeLiked by 3 people
As Simplicius observes today, that air base is not “behind” the beach, it is several kilometers to the side.
Yes, I could not imagine a trajectory from somewhere around Odessa that went over the beach but if it was targeted by EW or, since I’m a layman, maybe by a rocket hit, I don’t see a 4 or 5 km diversion as impossible.
In any case an attack at that time of day was a clear indication that there was no concern for civilian casualties.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was reading in another piece, some Russians think the attack came from Nikolaev, not Odessa. But I don’t know.
LikeLike
Yes. Also, why would the Ukies/US use anti personnel bomblets if they were trying to take out an air base? They would have used missiles with high explosives. Anyway, as pointed out by Simplicius, the trajectory is wrong for an attack on the air base. Occam’s razor would suggest the missile was originally heading, if not for the beach, then for a market or square in downtown Sevastopol, where lots of people would be vulnerable out in the open. I doubt that bomblets could take out a cathedral. This was a regular pattern when the Ukies were rocketing and shelling squares and markets in Donetsk, killing 30 or more people at a time. I vividly remember some of Lancaster’s videos showing hospitals in Donetsk for children and adults with blown-off feet due to the Ukies’ practice of sending missiles that littered the ground in the city with thousands of tiny anti-personnel mines that most people would never even notice. I agree with those who point out that Podoliak’s terrorist logic is an indirect admission that the attack on Sevastopol was intended to be an anti-personnel, i.e., anti-civilian attack, i.e., ethnic cleansing — a direct extension of Banderite Donbass policy since 2016. That was also the most obvious motive behind the terrorist attacks in Dagestan — to kill civilians, including a priest, and thereby start a civil war inside Russia.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great comment, cc, I agree with your analysis.
LikeLike
Small but important technical note: bomblets are in fact militarily useful against unarmored targets such as light vehicles, dispersed munitions/fuel storage and aircraft–as well as personnel, who might be scattered about an airbase. Russia, in response to the Wests shipments of cannister munitions (motivated as much by lack of regular shells as anything else), began deploying their own.
In particular, Russia has taken of late to sprinkling airfields with cannister rockets as they simply make a mess of anything in the area. That is, any exposed airframes, support vehicles, people, and the runways themselves, which have to be kept cleaner than a baby’s backside to avoid F-16s sucking up turbine-destroying debris.
The fact that cluster munitions scatter quite widely and have a high failure rate (around 50% with some older US versions) have led them to be branded as both militarily unsuited and unduly harmful to civilians. They de-facto function as mine-dispersal mechanisms, such as Ukraine has ALSO long used in the Donbass (petal mines, which Ukraine had factories for left from Soviet days).
From the perspective of someone who wants area denial, mine dispersal is a feature not a bug.
But again: it truly doesn’t matter, because Ukraine “owned” the intent to kill civilians, and therefore also intended the attack. It is quite possible that this “ownership” has caused such blowback in Washington that someone read Z the riot act.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent comment. It’s always good to remind people that one needs to keep a cool head and not get over-emotional about trigger words like “cluster bombs” and “children playing on the beach”. It’s true that NATO started employing these clusters because it was all they had left; and then Russia shrugged and said, “Okay, if you use them, then we do too,” which could be viewed as somewhat cynical.
But the main point here, and I agree with you and other analysts, is the whole issue of intent. The concept of “criminal intent”. Legally speaking, intent is the thing that separates a crime from an unfortunate accident.
The fact that Podoliak and other NATO spokespersons “owned” this intent, like you say, makes it impossible for them to roll it back and say, “Oops, it was an accident! We didn’t mean to hurt those kids!” Like the criminals they are at heart, they got angry and shot their stupid mouths off, thus denying themselves the possibility of plausible denial!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Also, check this Doctorow vid around 9 minutes in: His point being that the cluster munitions are by their nature, not fit for military targets, and this strike must therefore, logically, have been intended against civilians:
LikeLike
I’m guessing if Hamas said something like this about October 7th, it would be headlines everywhere.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think the Hamas leaders are too smart to say anything like that. It’s the Israeli leaders who go on about “Amalek” and their murderous gangsta-God.
LikeLike
“Zelensky’s Chief Advisor, Mikhail Podoliak…declared the residents of the peninsula civilian occupiers…Crimea is like a giant military camp…hundreds of military targets…Russians use the civilians as human shields [which] we regard as civilian occupiers.”
Two more points I want to make about Mikhail Podoliak venomous dictata:
1] It is the goosestepan-Galician-goons who are the “occupiers” not the ethno-cultural Russian population…as the 300 years of maps* [see above] attest. I didn’t want to let that pass without rebuttal.
2] The civilians on the beach were nowhere near the “supposed” target, it was the US-Army/Air-Force operators that chose that radar evading path over the holiday beach goers who were miles away from the “supposed” target. Only a lying jack-ass would claim the beach goers were being used as a human shield by the Russians, most likely, the opposite is true, the US-Operators were cynically using civilians as a shield…and that’s assuming civilians were not the target in the first place.
*https://internationalman.com/articles/david-stockman-on-the-ukrainian-border-war-folly/
LikeLike
yalensis – thanks…
i agree with the above commentators…. bottom line, the words of Zelensky’s Chief Advisor, Mikhail Podoliak highlight how this ukee regime are full on nazis and they have the full support of the west – as sickening as this is – it is true…
and as mike points out – if hamas had of said anything like this – we would still be reading it 9 months later.. instead – silence from the paid for msm that is so typical of societies that fall prey to propaganda and rely on omissions to safe their bacon… they can’t hide this, as much as they’d like to… this doofus podoliak speaks for the zelensky regime with full support from cia – m16 and all the other friends who are willing accomplices to horrific actions akin to what the nazis did, and or worse..
LikeLike
Simplicius76’s article here:
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/sitrep-62624-things-heat-up-with
discusses the flight path of the beach ATACMS and tentatively concludes that
LikeLike
The NATO folks are just getting so open now about their genocidal intents, not even bothering to hide it. I particularly like that quote from Gunther Fehlinger: “We won the Cold War by arming the Taliban in Afghanistan to enable them to defeat the Soviet Union. We must do the same today by arming Russian internal Islam based armed opposition to dismantle Russia.”
By “must do the same”, he of course means “already trying to do the same…”
LikeLiked by 1 person
He’s too illiterate to even know that the Taliban was created to fight the Mujahideen that NATO armed in Afghanistan.
LikeLike
Or that the Taliban is now sort of allied with Russia!
LikeLike
I saw the headline and thought this post might be about the cannibals who ate Bidead’s uncle in WW II. DISAPPOINTED!…
LikeLike
Oh, so sorry, Bukko! I heard that the cannibals who ate Biden’s uncle had to puke him up later and vowed never again, no American fast food!
LikeLike