Ukraine ‘strikes Russian airfields destroying nuke bombers' in huge drone blitz as footage shows aircraft up in flames
TWO major Russian airbases holding nuclear warplanes have reportedly been blitzed in a targeted drone strike - landing a huge blow to Putin's war.
A Ukrainian Security official told Reuters that the SBU conducted a large drone attack on over 40 Russian military aircraft.
3
Olenya nuclear bomber air base in Murmansk region was ablaze today after a suspected drone strike
Credit: East2West
3
Olenya air base holds nuclear capable war planes
Credit: East2West
3
A devastating drone strike has hit Putin's airbases
Credit: East2West
The source did not specify where the drone attack took place, but Ukrainian media said that Olenya airbase - home to Russia's Tu-95 strategic bombers - had been targeted.
The second base under fire is understood to be the Belaya nuclear airbase in eastern Siberia's Irkutsk region - some 2,900 miles from Ukraine.
Extraordinary footage showed smoked billowing from mad Vlad's bases as Russian troops watched on in horror.
Ukraine's Pravda Gerashchenko Telegram channel said: 'A special operation 'Web' is being conducted to demilitarise Russia.
'The [SBU] report the destruction of Russian bomber aircraft behind enemy lines."
They added: 'In particular, the destruction of more than 40 aircraft, including A-50, Tu-95 and Tu-22M3.'
Local residents reported hearing explosions as swathes of Ukrainian UAVs struck Putin's bases.
Both airfields are miles from the bloody frontline, but were still "under drone attack" by Ukrainian forces.
The attack is believed to have been launched from within Russia, possibly from inside trucks driving nearby their targets.
It marks one of the bleakest days of the war for Russian President Vladimir Putin who is continuing to relentlessly blitz Ukraine.
Ukraine's SBU secret service was reportedly conducting a large-scale special operation to destroy Russian bombers.
Local media in Ukraine claimed more than 40 of bloodthirsty Putin's aircraft had been hit.
This included the infamous Tu-95, as well as the Tu-22M3, and A-50 strategic bombers.
A report said the driver of the truck that released the drones "may not have known" that his vehicle was full of the Ukrainian UAVs.
According to Baza media, the driver has since been detained.
Local media said: "A truck stopped at a gas station at the entrance to the city.
"Drones started flying out of the back of the truck and then attacked various objects."
More to follow... For the latest news on this story, keep checking back at The U.S. Sun, your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, sports news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures, and must-see videos.
Like us on Facebook at TheSunUS and follow us on X at @TheUSSun
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New European
33 minutes ago
- New European
Britain enters a new nuclear age
Alongside an ambitious plan to build up to 12 new attack submarines, and to create jobs in six new ammunition factories, one of the most striking commitments is to enter discussions with the USA aimed at 'enhanced participation in Nato's nuclear mission'. This innocuous sounding sentence represents a big change in nuclear posture. Make no mistake: today's Strategic Defence Review marks the start of British rearmament. Not only does it signal the UK's commitment to increase defence spending to 3% of GDP, but to a type of spending designed to enhance the UK's strategic clout in the world. At present, only Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands host US-owned tactical nuclear bombs, with their aircraft designed to be 'dual capable' of delivering such bombs on target. The UK, which lacks tactical nuclear weapons, could now volunteer to do likewise, but would need to buy a different variant of the F-35 combat aircraft than the one that is flown from the Royal Navy's carriers. That would be a major change in nuclear policy – because the British deterrent has, since the 1990s, been strategic-only. As I've argued here before, we need a wider range of options because Putin is now making regular threats to use nukes against Nato, and tactical nukes against Ukraine – so it makes sense to place more of Nato's collective nuclear armoury closer to the front line, and distributed among a larger number of allies. Over and above deterring Russian aggression, almost everything Labour has announced today looks designed to achieve three things: to boost Britain's influence among its allies, to deliver high skilled jobs to places where they are scarce, and to get ahead of the game in the military technologies of the future. These don't only include drones – though the spectacular Ukrainian strike on Russia's strategic bomber fleet on Sunday shows that we've hardly even begun to understand their power. The technological arms race is now focused on niche areas of science – like nanotech, materials and quantum computing – and Labour, to its credit, has understood that it in any conflict with Russia it is the science labs of Oxbridge, Imperial and Edinburgh, not the 'playing fields of Eton', that might be decisive. Suggested Reading We must take a nuclear leap into the unknown Paul Mason For the armed forces, often bound by tradition and prone to inter-service rivalry, making the SDR work will be a challenge. Because in every domain of warfare – land, air, sea, space and cyberspace – they face the same problem: they are running decades-old kit designed for an era when Britain could choose which wars it fights, while at the same time moving to a completely new, digitally enabled way of fighting, in which technological change never stops. In this context, faced with a Russia that has turned itself into a war economy, and itself learned to innovate rapidly – deterrence comes down to showing Putin that our own industry, science and digital technology base could crank itself up to speed, and indeed surpass what Russia itself could achieve. For me, the most basic task of the SDR was to assess the scale of the Russian threat and offer the electorate an honest proposal of how to meet it – within our means. Though it might sound simple to achieve, it was not achieved at any point during 14 years of Conservative government, above all after 2020, when Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings declared a 'tilt' of security priorities towards Asia, while systematically underfunding the ministry of defence. Labour reversed that stance, declaring from day one that its priority is: 'Nato First'. The SDR places maritime warfare as the highest priority and designates the Atlantic and the Arctic as the UK's prime areas of interest. There's been a row today over the precise form of words Keir Starmer is using – describing the 3% target in the 2030s as an ambition. I think it's clear that Labour means to find the money to achieve that – but it stands way outside the term of UK fiscal forecasting, and no chancellor would allow it to be stated as a firm commitment outside of a budget statement. The real question with the SDR is: do the capabilities match the threats? The answer is: only if you believe Russia can be deterred through Nato remaining cohesive and the UK leading an enhancement of continent-wide nuclear deterrence. If it cannot, then 3, 4 or even 5% won't be enough. In 1939, after seven years of rearmament, Britain's defence budget was 9% of GDP – and once war broke out it rose above 50%. Today's focus on the big stuff – submarines, which are the capital ships of the 21st century, and a £15bn upgrade to nuclear warheads – reflects Starmer's determination for this country to avoid any impression that it wants to be 'Little Britain'. With a cash-strapped treasury, it is a decision to spend on what's strategic, and rely on allies for that which is not. There is even the promise, thinking long term, to specify within this parliament a replacement for the Dreadnought submarines, currently being built at Barrow: and they don't even go out of service until 2050. I would like to have seen more spending and faster – above all because defence industrial investment is one of the surest ways to boost growth and social cohesion in communities that have seen too little of it. But until Labour can win the argument with the British people that they need to pay more tax, and tolerate more borrowing to fund defence, progress is going to be incremental. That, in turn, will depend on the outcome of Ukraine's peace negotiations with Russia. If they fail – and that looks likely – people may wake up to the fact that the prospect of endless war on our doorstep requires a change of attitude to defence. In that sense, the SDR was the start, not the end, of something.
NBC News
36 minutes ago
- NBC News
Covert Ukrainian drone operation strikes dozens of Russian jets
A covert Ukrainian drone operation struck 41 Russian jets on military bases inside Russia, according to Ukrainian officials. They describe the operation which included releasing drones by remote control from trucks outside the military bases. Russia is calling the operation terrorism. NBC News' Keir Simmons reports.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Trump officials open up millions of acres in Alaska to drilling and mining
Millions of acres of Alaska wilderness will lose federal protections and be exposed to drilling and mining in the Trump administration's latest move to prioritize energy production over the shielding of the US's open spaces. Doug Burgum, the interior secretary, said on Monday that the government would reverse an order issued by Joe Biden in December that banned drilling in the remote 23m-acre National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A), the New York Times reported. The former president's executive order was part of a package of protections for large areas of Alaska, some elements of which the state was challenging in court when he left office in January. Burgum was speaking in Alaska on Monday accompanied by Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin, and energy secretary Chris Wright. He said the Biden administration had prioritized 'obstruction over production' and Biden's order was 'undermining our ability to harness domestic resources at a time when American energy independence has never been more critical'. In a post to Twitter/X, Wright said oil production was the 'engine of economic growth' in Alaska, funding more than 90% of the state's general revenue. 'Unleashing American energy goes hand in hand with unleashing American prosperity,' he wrote. Donald Trump declared a 'national energy emergency' on the first day of his second term of office in January, promising an avalanche of executive orders friendly to the fossil fuel industry and supporting his campaign message of 'drill, baby drill'. Environmental groups had long feared Alaska would be the US president's number one target given the state's abundance of untapped oil and gas reserves, and immediately criticized the move to open up drilling in an area crucial to the survival of imperiled Arctic species. 'The Trump administration's move to roll back protections in the most ecologically important areas of the Western Arctic threatens wildlife, local communities, and our climate, all to appease extractive industries,' Kristen Miller, executive director of the Alaska Wilderness League, said in a statement. 'This is another outrageous attempt to sell off public lands to oil industry billionaires at the expense of one of the wildest places left in America. 'These lands are home to caribou, migratory birds, and vital subsistence resources that Indigenous communities have relied on for generations. The public fought hard for these protections, and we won't stay silent while they're dismantled.' The NPR-A lies about 600 miles north of Anchorage, and is bordered by the Chukchi Sea to the west and Beaufort Sea to the north. It is the largest single area of public land in the US, the Times reported. It was created at the beginning of the 20th century as an emergency fuel reserve for the military, and expanded to full commercial development in 1976 by an act of Congress. Lawmakers, however, ordered that land conservation measures and wildlife protections should be given prominence. Trump's efforts to turbocharge drilling in Alaska, however, have not been as popular as he would have liked. Despite a promise to 'open up' the 19m-acre Arctic national wildlife refuge, a proposed auction of leases in January, authorized by the previous Congress but a crucial plank of the incoming president's energy strategy, did not attract any bidders. 'There are some places too special and sacred to exploit with oil and gas drilling,' Laura Daniel-Davis, the acting deputy secretary of the interior department, told the Times.
