>

I know the distance because I checked it trying to figure what the target might be.   I just do not believe the Russians would waste munitions on a civilian target.  I do not see them as oafish as you may.  Ukraine NEO Nazis is a different matter.   I see the whole Ukraine government as evil due to their treatment of Ukrainian ethnic Russians prior to the war.
Sometimes i have the feeling Putin want to lose.
One week before the Ramstein meeting he delivers a reason why tanks should be delivered >

14 tanks is fuck all. >

Gotta love the poorly thought out false equivalence on reddit >

I'm 14 and this is deep. >

If the missiles you are talking about are so good then why didn’t they hit a Ukrainian military position instead of an apartment building - Russia has been spamming hypersonic missiles including anti-ship missiles into Ukrainian cities for months - how exactly is that a threat to a tank?
If they could hit the tanks with these hypersonic missiles they’d be doing it already, the fact they are hitting civilian infrastructure shows you they probably aren’t that capable of hitting a target as small as a tank. >

What makes you think that the target hit was not a military target.  Ukrainians are known to hide their forces amongst the noncombatants. >


What makes you think that the target hit was not a military target.

There's a few reasons, most are common sense which evidently you don't seem to have but I'll put it across.
Firstly, Dnipro isn't even remotely close to the front line, it's nearly 200KM - the only equipment that the Ukrainians use which could hit that is a HIMARS which wouldn't really work if you blocked it's path to the enemy with a gigantic fucking apartment building.
Secondly, the only known times we've seen Ukrainians within the civilian population was during the start of the war when they placed Air Defence systems into cities which where already being systematically bombed and needed defending.
HIMARS aren't going to be in Dnipro by logic because the frontline would be on the edge of their range, logically they would be placed further forward so they can hit more strategic targets - they largely aren't used against infantry, instead focused on logistic dumps and Russian bases, it can't do that from Dnipro.
That's common sense and logic, how about instead of shilling for the Russians and creating theories without any evidence or basis, you actually take a look at how Ukraine employs it's military equipment and then note the distance of the frontline to Dnipro and then reassess exactly why even if there was a military target in Dnipro, why Russia would aim for that instead of something closer which is a more tangible target, Bakhmut perhaps?