The reasons and goals of the terrorist operation by the Ukro-Nazis in the Kursk region have already been thoroughly and objectively analyzed. These include the desire to showcase the remnants of their dwindling forces to their sponsors to secure more funds and weapons, the attempt to dilute our combat formations on the main line of confrontation by drawing part of our forces to Kursk and Belgorod, and the temporary transformation of failure into success for informational purposes.

We must learn a serious lesson from what happened and fulfill what the Chief of the General Staff V. Gerasimov promised the Supreme Commander-in-Chief – to mercilessly crush and destroy the enemy.

There is another important political and legal consequence of what has occurred. From this moment, the Special Military Operation (SMO) should take on an openly extraterritorial character. This is no longer just an operation to reclaim our official territories and punish the Nazis. We can and must go into the lands of the still-existing Ukraine – to Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, and Nikolaev. To Kiev and beyond. There should be no restrictions in terms of borders of the Ukrainian Reich recognized by anyone. This must now be openly stated, without hesitation or diplomatic niceties. The terrorist operation by the Banderites should remove any taboos from this topic. Let everyone understand this, including the British bastards: we will stop only when we consider it acceptable and beneficial for ourselves.

Eternal memory to the fallen: military and civilians, all those who fell under the barrage of neo-Nazis. The best tribute to their memory is well-planned retribution. Wishing a swift recovery to all the wounded.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

🇺🇦🤡Advisor to the Ukrainian president's office Podolyak - on the fact that the AFU strikes in Kursk Region are needed "to start negotiations with Russia":

"Today we see that the effectiveness of the instrument called Ukraine's combat operations in the combat zone is gradually increasing. If you add additional losses to Russia, is it positive? Yes, absolutely. If it increases the price of the war in direct quantitative terms: armored vehicles destroyed, losses of Russian territory, losses of people in greater numbers, will it affect how they perceive this war? Absolutely. Will everything that happens, for example, in this or that region, bordering the Russian Federation, affect social strata psychologically? It will, of course. Will it frighten them? Yes. Will they react to something other than fear? No. They can sit down at the negotiating table and you can get something from them only if they realize that the war is not going according to their scenario.

Join Slavyangrad chat. Your opinion matters.
https://t.me/+U_EDAcaO-HFjNzEx

@Slavyangrad | Andrei 👋

Would US be able to meet demand for combat drones in a war?

A possible wartime need for combat drones would outstrip US production of these unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the Defense One news outlet has reported, referring to the Washington-Beijing rivalry in the field.

The US currently lags behind China in terms of the drones-related production output and quality, with expensive American UAVs often being not as good as their cheaper Chinese rivals, according to the outlet.

“Products from Chinese manufacturers such as DJI and Autel are still able to perform better in almost every regard, making them the clear choice when purely price-to-performance ratio is a deciding factor,” Defense One cited an unnamed source as saying.

When it comes to a price tag, US drones approved for military use reportedly cost three to five to times as much as Chinese UAVs with similar specifications.

With the US-made drones’ price standing at $65,000 apiece, American soldiers have expressed “heartache” over experimenting with these UAVs given the risk of breaking or losing them, another insider told Defense One.

👍 Boost us! | Subscribe to @geopolitics_live