Apparently, Ukrainian drones pushed through and started a chain reaction.
Explosions reportedly continued for hours, and authorities evacuated nearby settlements. Initial reports indicate that the site, previously protected by one of Russia’s densest air defense networks, suffered catastrophic damage.
Can we have links to more reputable, known news sites please? Never heard of that one. Here’s the BBC.
Huh, I suppose maybe a drone-sized violation?
ah yes, i always threaten journalists when there’s nothing to report
Have seen euromaidanpress articles before, I think they’re legit if not a bit sensationalist and obviously very pro-Ukraine.
And of course Russia blames a smoooooking incident. There’s this one Russian guy who just smokes everywhere he shouldn’t. Munition storages, aviation bases, flagship Moskva…
Sensationalism is the kind of red flags I run away from… Obviously the BBC have their own political slant, but I’m aware of it and can correct for that. Same when I read an article from something like Fox “News”.
But if you give me some unknown site of which I don’t know the background and more importantly, who’s funding it, then it’s useless to me and I’ll just add it to the bunch of misinformation machines I run into everyday.
Why am I now picturing a chain smoking Forrest Gump? “Life is like a pack of cigarettes, you never know what’s gonna blow up.”
Same guy who removes the safety rails around balconies
The safety violation will be that the ammunition wasn’t stored in the proper storage bunkers and was therefore vulnerable to an attack setting off the whole lot.
…and then an attack did just that.
Violated their air space byotch….
You cannot ask for a serious source and then link the BBC.
Of course I can, look, I just did.
At that point stick with Euromaidan. They are more credible than BBC.
On your word?
No these guys
Good link thanks, let me book mark it if I ever need to waste someone’s time.
Thx for the superior one
Those media bias folks hate all sources so whichever you link to someone else is gonna hate on (for good reason perhaps!)—but 2 is better than 1 :)
Removed by mod
Hi, I’m a left wing rather than right wing idiot. The BBC has proved itself an unreliable source plenty of times. They’re beholden to political influence (see today’s story about one of their staff not being allowed to talk about heat pumps because it’s a “political issue”)
And what sort of bias do they have? Their directors and senior journalists are time-servers and toadies put in place by the Conservatives during their 14 years in power. Starmer has not cleaned up that mess. Gilligan: Tory. Kuenssberg: Tory and Boris Johnson admirer. There are few centre-left voices and none at all speaking from a more leftist point of view.
I think it’s more that the British Press in general is pretty political, heavy on the spin and hence one of the least trusted in Europe by the locals themselves.
When it comes to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine - which is very politically and geostrategically significant for the UK government - the level and direction of the bias of the BBC is no different from the Euromaidan Press hence for those who think the latter is not a “serious source”, the former is also not a “serious source”.
Mind you, on different subjects which are not related to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine (such as the Israeli Genocide in Gaza) I fully expect the Euromaidan Press is often less biased (on this specific example, significantly so) than the BBC.
Just because the BBC is posh doesn’t mean they’re honest (in fact from my own experience living in the UK, posh more often than not means fake. manipulative and dishonest)
Ha. They don’t write- they wait to be given their talking points, and parrot them until new ones are issued.
Did you find that Hamas base under the hospital yet?