The advanced S-400 ‘Triumf’ air-defence system was destroyed in a joint operation by Kyiv’s security service and navy, Ukrainian intelligence sources said The attack off the coast of Yevpatoriya was orchestrated through the aerial drones and Neptune domestic missiles, Ukrainian official Anton Gerashchenko said

Ukraine used drones and missiles to take down an advanced Russian air-defence system worth US$1.2 billion early on Thursday, according to multiple reports.

The advanced S-400 “Triumf” air-defence system was destroyed in a joint operation by Kyiv’s security service (SBU) and navy, the BBC and Reuters reported, citing Ukrainian intelligence sources.

The attack off the coast of Yevpatoriya was orchestrated through the use of aerial drones and Neptune domestic missiles, per Anton Gerashchenko, a Ukrainian official writing on Telegram.

Yevpatoriya is a coastal city in the west of occupied Crimea, which Russia seized from Ukraine in 2014.

  • barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think there was any support from China in the first place it’s just that China didn’t want to cross Russia publicly. They probably did remind Russia of the nuclear guarantees they gave to Ukraine in private, which is why we hear Russia threatening the west but not Ukraine, and then sat back while Russia dug its own grave. Publicly opposing Russia might have stopped Russia from doing that. Generally speaking, you can expect the Chinese to be shifty just as you can expect Yanks to whip their dick around and the Swiss to profit by harbouring money.

    And while some Chinese munition was found in Russian stockpiles it’s overall quite little, probably arriving there via third parties. If China actually backed Russia up with hardware things would look quite different.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        …and the Russia went straight ahead practically days after doing egregious shit that China is not cool with, never has been, having misconstrued talk for willingness to walk. Russian diplomats should know the Chinese well enough to know, but when has Putin ever listened to people.

    • Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You only hear Russia threaten the west, but not Ukraine? You don’t remember when they pushed through the vote to annex the Donbas area, because making it officially Russian territory gives them the excuse to nuke to defend it?

      Here’s a more recent reminder: https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/31/europe/medvedev-russia-nuclear-weapons-intl-hnk/index.html

      I’d also be interested in seeing any evidence of Chinese guarantees of Ukraine, if you got any handy. Only fools trust rumors.

      Your last paragraph was actually accurate, surprisingly. I suppose a little bit of truth seasons a bunch of random-ass claims like salt, doesn’t it?

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nuclear threats in particular. “Attack with nuclear weapons or threats thereof”. They stopped just short of calling it a nuclear umbrella, considering it simply an expression of their non-proliferation doctrine, “make sure nuclear blackmail isn’t a thing so states don’t feel the need to acquire nukes”.

        The text of the unilateral declaration is apparently here but I don’t read Chinese and google translate doesn’t like pictures.

        • Candelestine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fair. Maybe someone can come by and read it. I’ll point out though, that Ukraine had similar “guarantees” with the US, the UK and Russia.

          Statements without explicitly requiring a delineated mechanism of response can be empty words, even when signed as a treaty. As Ukraine’s experiences should clearly demonstrate, though it shouldn’t be hard to think of other times when treaties proved to be mere empty words.