(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Ukraine Invasion Day 462: US support is a 'carpetbagger' op in the antifa tradition [1]
['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']
Date: 2023-05-30
Russian President Vladimir Putin attempted to downplay the drone attack on Moscow to avoid exposing the limited options he has to retaliate against Ukraine. Putin claimed that Russian forces struck the Ukrainian military intelligence headquarters “two [to] three days ago” and claimed that the Russian Armed Forces continue to respond to Ukraine’s “war against Donbas” by striking Ukrainian military infrastructure. [13] Putin insinuated that the drone strike on Moscow was Kyiv’s response to Russian strikes, and the Russian MoD conveniently claimed on May 30 that Russian forces carried out “a group of strikes with long-range high-precision air-launched weapons at main decision-making centers” in Ukraine. [14] The Russian MoD did not claim that it had struck the Ukrainian military intelligence headquarters recently and there is no available confirmation of Putin’s claim. [15] Putin stated that Ukraine is trying to provoke a response and make Russia “mirror” its actions. Putin’s emphasis on past and ongoing missile strikes is likely an attempt to signal that Russia is already actively retaliating and does not need to respond to further Ukrainian provocations . Putin has consistently retaliated against genuine and purported Ukrainian actions by ordering massive missile and drone campaigns, likely due to Russian forces’ inability to achieve any decisive effects on the battlefield. [16]
Russia claimed that Ukraine conducted a series of drone strikes against Moscow on May 30 as Russia again targeted Ukraine with Iranian-made Shahed drones. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) accused Ukraine of attacking Moscow with eight drones on the morning of May 30, and claimed that Russian forces shot down five of the drones and suppressed three drones with electronic warfare systems. [1] Russian propagandist Vladimir Solovyev, however, claimed that Ukraine launched 32 drones of which some targeted the prestigious neighborhood of Rublyovka in Moscow Oblast. [2 ] A Russian independent outlet claimed that the drone strikes predominantly targeted areas near Russian President Vladimir Putin’s residence in Novo-Ogaryovo and other elite neighborhoods in Moscow Oblast. [3] Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin stated that several buildings in Moscow suffered minor damage, and Russian sources amplified footage of a minor explosion in the Novaya Moskva neighborhood. [4] A Russian milblogger claimed that drones flying over Moscow resembled Ukrainian attack drones. [5] Geolocated footage shows Russian forces shooting down drones identified as Ukrainian by OSINT accounts in several different areas of Moscow and Moscow Oblast. [6] Ukrainian presidential aide Mykhailo Podolyak denied that Ukraine was directly involved in the drone strike but forecasted that there could be an increase in such attacks in the future. [7]
3. Could also be that Ukraine is trying for economic damage (less likely) 4. Choice of targets may be more indicative of the warhead size on such drones: they're too small to do great damage to things that don't burn or explode
Russian and Ukrainian sources reported that Ukrainian forces struck objects along the southern axis. Zaporizhia Oblast occupation official Vladimir Rogov claimed on May 30 that Ukrainian forces are striking roads and bridges in Russian-occupied Zaporizhia Oblast and struck the road connecting Russian-occupied Vasylivka and Dniprorudne. [49] Rogov also reported that Ukrainian forces struck Mykhailivka (about 45km north of Melitopol) on May 30. [50] Ukrainian Melitopol Mayor Ivan Fedorov reported that Ukrainian forces struck Mykhailivka on May 29 and 30. [51] Geolocated images posted on May 29 reportedly show damage from a Ukrainian HIMARS strike against a parking lot with Russian cars in Mykhailivka. [52] Mariupol Mayoral Advisor Petro Andryushchenko reported that Ukrainian forces struck a Russian-occupied building in Yurivka (on the coast of the Sea of Azov, about 30km west of Mariupol). [53] Images that surfaced on May 30 reportedly show a destroyed Russian 55K6A command post vehicle for the S-400 air defense system which Ukrainian forces reportedly destroyed in an unspecified area in Kherson Oblast on May 20. [54]
Russian forces did not conduct any confirmed ground attacks along the southern axis on May 30. The Ukrainian General Staff and Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Malyar reported that Russian forces are conducting defensive operations in the southern operational direction in Kherson and Zaporizhia oblasts. [47] Russian forces continued to conduct regular indirect fire against Ukrainian-held settlements across the southern frontline. [48]
The tempo of Russian and Ukrainian offensive operations in the Bakhmut direction remains low as of May 30. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces did not conduct offensive operations in the Bakhmut direction on May 30. [36] Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Malyar reported that Russian forces are replacing and regrouping their forces in the Bakhmut direction, and that Ukrainian forces are focusing on other tasks and have not advanced in the northern and southern outskirts of Bakhmut for several days. [37] Ukrainian Eastern Group of Forces Spokesperson Colonel Serhiy Cherevaty stated that Ukrainian forces obliterated Wagner Group’s offensive capabilities and that Ukrainian strikes against Russian forces inflict significant casualties – 80 killed and 119 injured as of May 30 – as Wagner forces conduct their relief in place. [38] Cherevaty stated that only two or three engagements occurred in the Bakhmut direction in recent days and no combat clashes occurred on May 30. Some Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces conducted limited counterattacks, however. The Russian Southern Group of Forces Spokesperson Vadim Astafyev claimed that Russian forces repelled three Ukrainian ground attacks in the Soledar-Bakhmut direction, and a Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces conducted counterattacks near Andriivka and Klishchiivka (both within 7km south of Bakhmut). [39] The milblogger also claimed that Russian forces conducted unsuccessful attacks near Ivanivske (6km west of Bakhmut) and Orikhovo-Vasylivka (11km northwest of Bakhmut). [40]
Russian forces conducted limited ground attacks northeast of Kupyansk and northwest of Svatove on May 30. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces conducted unsuccessful offensive operations near Masyutivka (13km northeast of Kupyansk), Krokhmalne (20km northwest of Svatove), and Novoselivske (15km northwest of Svatove). [30] Ukrainian Luhansk Oblast Head Artem Lysohor reported that Russian forces conducted offensive actions near Stelmakhivka (15km northwest of Svatove). [31] A Russian news aggregator claimed that Russian forces are gradually advancing in Masyutivka. [32] ISW has still not observed visual confirmation of any Russian advances in or control over Masyutivka.
Operation Carpetbagger was a World War II operation to provide aerial supply of weapons and other matériel to resistance fighters in France, Italy and the Low Countries by the U.S. Army Air Forces that began on 4 January 1944.
www.smithsonianchannel.com/...
Carpetbagger B-24 Modifications
Early aircraft painted black all over; later, black underneath, with the upper surfaces left olive-drab. Standard black matte applied to upper surfaces of aircraft arriving unpainted
• Removal of waist and cheek guns
• Blacked-out glass in the waist windows, cheeks and under the nose
• Flash suppressors on the top- and tail-turret machine guns, flame dampers on engine exhausts
• American bomb shackles removed and replaced with British conversion shackles
• Removal of ball turret in belly to create “Joe hole”
• Two strongpoints for parachute static lines installed at Joe hole
• Extraneous radio gear, armor and high-altitude oxygen system removed
• Red interior lighting to preserve night vision
• Blister in pilot’s side window for improved downward visibility
• Nose antennae for Rebecca airborne transceiver
• Toned-down side insignia, although tail codes remained bright
www.historynet.com/...
Secretly airdropping OSS agents and supplies behind enemy lines in northern Europe from January 1944 through the end of the war, was the mission of the “Carpetbaggers,” a couple of squadrons of special, black-painted, four-engine, B-24 “Liberator” bombers assigned to the U.S. 8th Air Force in Britain (OSS airdrops in the Mediterranean were conducted mainly from Algeria and later from Italy).133 Flying alone at night, quickly and at low altitudes, usually not more than a mile high, the plane would drop propaganda leaflets as a cover for its real mission. “We’d be looking for a meadow, then flashes from a couple of flashlights would appear,” recalled Lieutenant Eugene Polinksy, a navigator from Maywood, New Jersey. “We would drop down to 200 to 400 feet, open the bomb bay doors and send out supplies, munitions, etc. in parachute containers—or insert an agent.”134 The anonymous agents, whether men or women, were known simply as “Joes.” He or she would slide back a cover from a round hole in the bottom of the fuselage, the “Joe hole,” sit with legs dangling out and when given the signal would drop into the night. At 200 to 400 feet, the agent would be on a ground in a few seconds, barely enough time for the parachute to open.
www.nps.gov/...
The White Brigade of the Belgian resistance seized the port of Antwerp before the Germans could destroy it as they were planning....After previously ordering the Channel ports to be cleared first, Montgomery decided the importance of Antwerp was such that the capture of Dunkirk could be delayed.[17] ... Once the German defenders were no longer a threat, it took another three weeks to de-mine the harbours; the first convoy carrying Allied supplies could not unload in Antwerp until 29 November 1944. Once Antwerp was opened, it allowed 2.5 million tons of supplies to arrive at that port between November 1944 and April 1945, which were critical to the successful Allied advance into Germany in 1945.
en.wikipedia.org/…
Despite their heavy losses, the Witte Brigade, along with the Armée secrète, the Front de l'Indépendance, the Mouvement National Royaliste and Groupe G, helped allied forces capture the port of Antwerp intact in 1944. The Witte Brigade prevented the Germans, who had attached explosives to docks and cranes, from scuttling the facilities’ infrastructure, allowing the port to be opened once the Scheldt was cleared of sea mines. Additionally, the Witte Brigade acted as a scouting and intelligence network for the Canadian 4th, 5th and 6th brigades in September 1944. The Witte Brigade provided reports on the Germans' strength, defences, and numbers. Additionally, resistance members pinpointed the location of German minefields.[12] The influence of the Witte Brigade was considerable. The organization had been known popularly as the "White Brigade" so, after liberation, the group changed its name, adding the word "Fidelio", the pseudonym of Louette.
en.wikipedia.org/…
The crowning achievement of the Belgian Resistance was the certain capture of the Antwerp port. In late August, members of a company sized MNR/NKB group under Eugène Colson, codenamed “Harry,” disabled demolition charges in the Antwerp port in late August. On September 1st, the Antwerp resistance received a message from London indicating a state of general alert. A second message arrived on the second ordering them to distribute arms and ready themselves for battle. On the night of the 3rd, the Antwerp resistance was ordered to go into action the following day. Early on the 4th Colson’s NKBers went into action, first seizing the old Bonaparte Dock and then fighting their way to the northwest, eventually seizing the Kruisschans Lock on September 7th. Meanwhile other AS/GL, PA, and MNR/NKB groups fought for the interior of the city and provided flank guards and guides for the approaching 11th Armoured Division. The Resistance continued to operate around Antwerp over the coming weeks, clearing the left bank of the Scheldt between September 9th and 20th (and suffering heavy losses in fighting at Kallo and Fort Sint-Marie) and executing a successful offensive to capture Wilmarsdonck.
www.wargamedesignstudio.com/...
web.archive.org/...
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/5/30/2172257/-Ukraine-Invasion-Day-462-US-support-is-a-carpetbagger-op-in-the-antifa-tradition
Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/
