Russia has allegedly launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) during an attack on Ukraine, according to Ukraine’s Air Force.
This is believed to be the first use of such a weapon, designed for delivering nuclear strikes over long distances, in the ongoing conflict.
The Ukrainian Air Force identified the missile as an RS-26 Rubezh, capable of carrying an 800-kg nuclear warhead and with a range of 5,800 km. However, there was no indication that the missile was nuclear-armed, and Russia has not commented on the allegation. The missile reportedly targeted infrastructure in the city of Dnipro, causing damage to industrial facilities and injuring two people.
Experts have described the alleged use of an ICBM in a conventional conflict as unprecedented, noting that these weapons are typically reserved for strategic deterrence. They highlighted the potential escalation such a deployment could signify.
The launch from Astrakhan follows a week of heightened tensions, with Ukraine using Western-supplied long-range missiles to strike targets deep within Russia. Moscow has repeatedly warned that such actions could be considered major escalations in the conflict. Russian sources have claimed that British Storm Shadow cruise missiles were used to target its Kursk region, while Ukraine has also reportedly deployed U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles.
Why are we so bothered about its flight method, i.e. unpowerd flight at the end of it flight (therefore ballistic) rather than the actual power (and therefore dmage) the explosive bit of the missile?
Because an ICBM launch could be misinterpreted as a nuclear strike triggering a nuclear response. This is why any test launches are planned well in advance and the plans shared between the nations.
Hmmm…wonder whether this launch was intended, w/ malice aforethought by the Orcs, to demonstrate to NATO that the next launch could contain a nuclear payload. The Orcs may deem this to be an appropriate response to revised NATO policy re longer ranged weapons in UKR conflict. Combined w/ a recently revised RU policy lowering the threshold for employment of nuclear weapons, perhaps this should dictate appropriate NATO countermeasures. 🤔
I suspect so, considering the timing.
Because if the Russian are so desperately short of tactical weapon that they have to resort to using very expensive ballistic missiles it gives a good indication of just how f**ked they are.
At least they can launch their ICBMs (it wasn’t one but whatever). Our so called government have disarmed this country while thinking it can poke about in other peoples business. We frankly deserve what is coming.
I’m in total agreement with your comment.
And what , pray tell ,would that be ?
Yet the front only keeps moving in one direction. Perhaps it is time for the MoD to once again announce new Russian casualty figures.
… But the overarching reality is that everything related to the West’s position now awaits the position of the Trump administration.
Or they are doing it because they know that once Trump gets in office he will brick himself and end the war on Russia’s terms
How delusional most of the people here are.
What make you think Russia is short of weapons.
How old are you?
This is a signaling or a test launch
Obviously this was to send a message that they “can” send nuclear strikes. Obviously a major escalation.
Precisely. I don’t understand all the speculation.
Since the start of this war i have been expecting the Russians send a nuke to Atlantic ocean as a message.
They are equally afraid of that level of escalation, and rightly so.
the fact they felt they even needed to do that is pretty telling. seems like all isnt going quite as planned in the 3 day SMO
Delusional you are
Not sure a major escalation, just a statement piece follows the US decision to ease up the restrictions, aimed at making the west think twice before easing the restrictions further.
Russia has been threatening to use nukes from the start, including increasing their readiness, deploying to Belarus etc, this is just another we have nukes statement doesn’t change anything materially. If they use a tactical one in Ukraine then that would be a whole different topic.
I think that this might be a good time for de-escalation and negotiation before things really get out of hand. The Leaders of the the West must know how high the stakes are. I was listening to Hamish De Bretton Gordon on 5 live yesterday and quite frankly I was shocked at what he said, and he’s a Military commentator as well.
Russia has consistently been the one escalating things, whether that is by nuclear posturing, bringing foreign troops into the conflict, launching attacks from countries other than itself, or attacking nuclear power plants. The leaders of the west know full well what happens when they just try to appease someone like Putrid
Do two wrongs make a right when so much is at stake.?.
No but one wrong makes one wrong…
What’s “wrong” with allowing Ukraine to defend itself within the widely accepted rules of international conflict?
I.e they shoot at us, we shoot back?
This is one ‘wrong’ and one legitimate response to a wrong.
Ukraine is free to defend it’s territory as it sees fit, no question about that, who is the ‘We’ you are referring to in firing back ?.
Let them use their own weapons then
by de-escalate you mean give Russia what it wants right? Given that we’re not the ones who have invaded a sovereign country, raped their Women, abducted their children and bomb their cities. There isn’t really a great deal we can do to deescalate. In fact its time we escalate and remind Russia they are not the only nuclear power in Europe and perhaps suggest to the Russian people that think its so great that they Nuke the UK that they too can expect our bombs in return. Maybe when its the mental image of their children being cooked they may not find it so funny.
Although this isn’t really a sign of escalation, rather a sign of desperation. We already know Russia has the ability to deploy nuclear weapons so them using their ICBMs to deliver conventual weapons is merely a demonstration on how short the Russians our in smart munitions.
Indeed. Russia can’t ‘escalate’ in the sense of directly attacking NATO without effectively committing suicide. They won’t do that unless they think their country is about to be literally overrun by an invader. The constant hand-wringing about ‘escalation’ is the reason that this war hasn’t already been brought to a decisive end in Ukraine’s favour.
The reality is this – there is no credible western victory plan.
How do you push a nuclear power out of territory it regards as vital? The reality is that there is only one way, escalate the war to the nuclear level. And it seems fairly clear that the West has no desire to do that so … so check mate.
We will see what the Trump administration will announce but negotiations seem ever more likely.
Ukraine isn’t vital to Russia. It might be vital to Putin, and the Dnieper water supply might be vital to the Crimea (although Putin could have built a couple of desalination plants). Neither makes Russia holding onto Ukraine vital.
It is possible if the Ukraine had enough troops and material.
It would obviously mean that Russian would have to use tactical nukes at least. After that…
Vital is what makes you willing die for. If you are not willing then it is not vital.
Russia is wrong on so many levels but they believe in what they are doing, just like the Ukrainians are. A negotiated settlement doesn’t mean giving in to the Russians, far from it. How much of Western Civilisation are you willing to trade for your beliefs?.
Russian Negation is i keep what i have and i take what you have as well. They don’t understand the concept of the carrot so we should show them the stick. Western civilisation is worthless if it gives in to bullies.
Ahh, yes, the ye olde “What tis mine is mine, and what tis thine, is negotiable.” Classic zero sum negotiation technique. 🤔😉
And why would Russia negotiate anything at this point if its on the pretends of us being scared of them and withdrawing aid from Ukraine. If we show we’re not willing to kill them they will just take what they want.
We don’t even need to be ‘willing to kill then’ for now simply not stopping the Ukranians doing it when required would be a start…..
I assume Hitler believed in what he was doing, as did Saddam, Stalin , Mussolini etc al so I fail to understand what that’s got to do with it.
And negotiation will mean giving into Russia land grab will it not. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be considered but don’t try and suggest otherwise it insults intelligence.
Why should we care about these distant peoples of whom we know nothing about 😀
That was an amazing speech, not being about appeasement, but about the need for British prepations for war, and the possible need for war itself, despite giving away the Sudetenland and despite Hitler’s assurances that he had no further ambitions in Europe. “Don’t be alarmed if you hear of men being called up to man anti-air defences or ships…” “I am myself a man of peace to the depths of my soul…, but….”
Perhaps we today are alarmed because we don’t hear of people being called up to crew anti-air defences or ships. Instead we ask, what anti-air defences, what people, what ships?
Sure Russia is wrong. No question. But it has nuclear weapons and we are not willing to esclate to that level. So negotiations seem likely.
So what next if Russian decides to push into Finland say? Do we negotiate then?
The RS-26 Rubezh is no more an ICBM than HMS Invincible was a through-deck cruiser. The RS-26 was fired once with an empty payload just beyond the technical limit of Intermediate Range (5,500 km), edging itself into the ICBM category. An Intermediate Range missile would have broken the 1987 INF treaty banning all such weapons, and when the Rubezh was fired 5,800km in 2012, Russia still paid the treaty lip service.
I wonder if Ukrainian drones can travel the 1000km in the other direction? Russia has claimed that Ukraine was working on 1,800 km range drones, in which case they must be expecting an Astrakhan wake-up call.
There is some speculation that this was an RS-26 launch. That is pretty big news as that’s an Intermediate range nuclear capable ballistic missile ( 4 MIRVs) which is banned by treaty…
Why is this important..well it means Russia has just fired a Nuclear capable IRBM in combat, a missile that could target London or any other European capital..it’s a profound kick in the nuts to European powers…
1) Putin is building up outside of treaties his nuclear forces specifically for use against the UK and France
2) this IRBM clearly has a conventional capability and the UK and Western European powers have no organic air defences capable of stopping a IRBM..if he wanted to he could drop one of these with a conventional warhead on the UK and we could not prevent it..all we could do would be to react.
The INF treaty is long dead. The US formally pulled out under President Trump’s previous term in 2019, because they claimed Russia had materially breeched it over many years. Hence the testing of ground-launched Tomahawks in the US and Europe going after ELSA.
And? So what, we could do the same back. ‘All we could do is react’ , well yes, it’s that reaction that stops this from happening. Your post is somewhat over alarmist with a cherry on top. We’ve been in this position since the start of the Cold War.
Yes. What’s changed over the last decade isn’t what Russia could do to us, it’s the removal of provisions designed to stop escalation happening accidentally. I’ve never been in agreement with the UK’s policy of not ruling out first strike, but right now I understand it better. President-Elect Trump is unpredictable. He’s as likely to try ending the war by saying, “you’ve got to get out of Ukraine, Vladimir. I have half a million troops on standby” as he is phoning Zelensky and telling him that the US is withdrawing support. When I look ahead and ask myself is this going to get butt-clenching, Cuban style, I can see the value of first strike ambiguity.
Umm it’s not alarmist is a reality, yes of course we would retaliate, but that does not prevent reaction and if Russia is developing a line of IRBMs with conventional warheads that’s an alarming risk to UK infrastructure that needs consideration not dismissal.
The so what we really actually need to get serious about IRBM ballistic missile defence for the Uk…just going we will fire something back is lovely but does fuck all about the fact our key bases may get hit. Being able to defend our key infrastructure from a escalatory strike is what is needed.
Finally it was an IRBM carrying a conventional payload, that from initial reports on the ground and what Russia has said was multiple hypersonic warheads.. just consider what that means for early warning and nuclear strategic response.. before today if someone fired an IRBM at the UK we know it was nuclear and would respond as such.. we now live in a world in which Russia is using IRBMs in conventional warfare.. that turns the whole early warning and nuclear response into a new level of risk… it’s a fucking nightmare and is scary.
The Missile was carrying what are known as Calibration / Test Weights which basically simulate Warheads. They don’t need Conventional Warheads as the speed and Kinetic energy are enough to cause serious damage.
It’s pretty irrelevant Paul, as you say a purely kinetic warhead at hypersonic speed does plenty..it’s that fact it’s a IRBM and has got a conventional payload option and has been used.
But in reality it’s was not a test weight, this was a full fat IRBM with independent re entry vehicles..no test weights are targeted re entry vehicles…tests weights go up but they are not targetable or capable of reentry.
As for we could do the same back.. no we could not, we don’t have a conventional IRBM and we would not go down the MAD route for a conventional attack.
Before today the only way Russia could attack UK ports or air bases was by either sending a nuclear sub or long range strike aircraft squadron to within 200-500 miles of the UK coast.. if the strike asset survived transit through the Norwegian Sea, at best it would launch around 20 cruise missiles.. these then had to get past the UK air defence systems.. the asset would never escape back up the Norwegian Sea… so a UK strike would be difficult, costly in irreplaceable SSN or strike squadron.. and may not even work… today Russia has shown it can fire a conventionally armed IRBM with probable multiple warheads.. from Russia into any part of the UK.. that’s very bad news in regards to how we protect our airbases and ports.. it will be a huge consideration in the defence review.. as for our response it would be one of our SSNs penetrating the northern bastion to fire up to 20 cruise missiles…
To be brutally honest Russia don’t need to get within 500 miles of the U.K. to launch an attack. Using air launched Kh101/102 cruise missiles, they can launch from 1500 miles away. Which is within the Russia itself. They also have the SSC-8, which is a ground launched cruise missile with a similar range to the Kh101.
From the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, it is only 880 miles (1417km) to London. This would put it firmly within strike range of the whole of the U.K.
By the sound of it the UK’s going to need something more than SkySabre and needed way sooner than later. Stop the dilly dallying. SAMP/T or Patriot should be available. Enhance the more T31s with greater AAW ability.
True. But I think the UK and sime NATO members would react and Russia has enough problems. I’m more concerned at more hybrid warfare hits on UK re sabotage – increase in factory fires, underwater infrastructure damage ( eg cables, piplines etc). On that note I’d like UK to seriously consider boarding suspicious vessels – wish Denmark/Sweden would too given the latest Baltic incident.
Based on released videos (and US intelligence), this was not an ICBM attack.
What do you think it was then ?.
to get technical the RS-26 isn’t an ICBM- its an IRBM, intermediate range ballistic missile with a range less than 6000km
Honestly I have never seen so many cheese eating surrender monkeys on this website before.
It’s astonishing how a few Russian trolls can whip up so many useful idiots to stand up for Putin’s position.
You would think people in the UK were being drafted for the tears of old women on this comment section.
Remove the warmonger Keir Starmer.
Hmm, surely you’re not talking about two tier Kier?
Remove the warmonger Vladimir Putin.
And execute him!
It would appear that the V1 doodlebugs we’re giving Ukraine are being replied to with V2 Vergelstungwaffe.
In which scenario did our over educated, unintelligent leaders and elites think this wasn’t gonna happen, we can only thank our lucky stars it wasn’t a Tsar bomb.
Vlad the mad is sending a message, can anyone guess what it is ?
Our imbecilic leaders are trying to claim the moral ground with someone who doesn’t care about that schiesse, they’re calling the bluff of a maniac, now is the time to be resolute in defence, we don’t know where the dice will fall, tyrannical Trump is gonna throw Ukraine to the wolves their only hope is there will be no fallout (literally) with the European’s.
Ivan is gonna get Crimea, Donetsk and Kursk and Zelensky will get Nada.
Kiev isn’t Nato so could well be made an example of, our imbecilic policies have only till January to run, here’s hoping we get that far.
Make peace you idiots. ❤️☮️
The Americans are escalating the war by allowing Ukraine to use their bibs to target Russia. It’s not the USA that will get the backlash but us in a Europe. I wish the yanks would push off and mind their own business.
Not sure what baby bibs have got to do with attacking Russia?
Anytime you want the US to withdraw from NATO just ask them. The new Administration will be most happy to oblige. Europe can fend for itself, and the US can spend the money saved on defending Europe on victims of its hurricanes and tornadoes. Problem solved.
Look up the Budapest Memorandum. If the US simply walks away from its allies and shows it can’t be trusted to follow up on it commitments, good luck to them fighting China / Russia/ N Korea on their own in both the Pacific and Atlantic in 10 years or so (likely sooner) with no support from those it walked away from. That money spent on hurricane relief will really be money well spent then. Being allies is a two way street…
Sorry… But i think we should have stepped in long before the Ukraine was invaded. We could have put troops into Poland on so say manoeuvres just like Russia did in Belarus… We could have sat there watching and listening… And he certainly wouldn’t have liked that.
And I really do think that Putin and his Russian war mongers would have been a lot more cautious about invading… But now because we never did anything and sat back like we did with Hitler.. He thinks NATO is weak, when we’re are not.. But we have weak leaders… NATO was formed to keep the peace… I guess that was just all talk back then in 1946.
And I ask you??? Imagine what our world would be like today had we and France not gone to war with Germany in 39… We all would be speaking German now.
Of course America has the own problems with China just like they did with Japan… But I think America underestimates China in my opinion.
This world is going to hell in a hand basket in my opinion…. I think a world war is very very likely in the near future.