Massive attack on Ukraine: from 72 official missiles to more than 180

The attack that left Ukraine without power: between 72 and more than 180 missiles

December 2022. The official count speaks of 72 missiles. Other sources put the figure above 180 and describe up to four waves, with strategic bombers flying over the country for hours. That's where the confusion lies: in an attack of this scale, no one has the exact count and each side has an interest in its version being the one that sticks. The starting figure, attributed to Ukrainian media, spoke of “more than 70 missiles in Ukraine in an hour,” with a total salvo of 72. Half the conversation draws the same conclusion: it could be the same attack counted twice and with two different numbers.

Military targets or an attack on civilian infrastructure?

One line of analysis argues that the only real target is civilian infrastructure and that this merely wastes the few missiles and drones available, because a good part would be shot down and the result on the front would not move an inch. Against that, another reading recalls that rear-area bombing has been part of every modern war and that debating its usefulness now, when both sides have spent forever bombing each other, is a naivety difficult to sustain.

The criticism of the first is that they turn something that is the norm into an exception. The criticism of the second is that they do not explain why targets are chosen that do not alter a single line of the front. And beneath the exchange of labels remains a practical question that almost no one addresses: if the objective is military and the result is not measured at the front, how is success evaluated?

The power grid, the real measurable damage

The tangible effect is not in the trenches but in the sockets. Reports circulating speak of downed power nodes and major cities without supply. One recurring calculation suggests that spare electricity pylons are already scarce across Europe precisely because of previous shipments to Ukraine, which would turn repairs into a problem of years, not weeks.

The damage reaches domestic detail. There is the case of a city where one building never suffered outages and several neighbors filed a complaint; now everyone is in the dark. The detail is amusing. The consequence is not: without power there is no hot water, no cooking, no industry, no commerce. And winter does not wait for the transformer to be restored.

Is Russia running out of missiles?

It is the most repeated argument. The depletion of Russia's arsenal was first claimed in April and has been repeated every month since, while launches keep occurring. From that clash come two opposing readings: that each new wave is the last, or that the shortage is relative and the real problem is the production rate, not the existence of stock.

On that basis, accounts circulate about purchases or transfers of missiles to third countries, though these are claims that the conversation itself treats as unconfirmed rumor. The final figure some give for this attack —fewer than 60 projectiles— feeds the attrition thesis. It does not settle it.

V1, Hiroshima and the analogies handbook

Historical parallels appear without asking permission: German V1 rockets over the United Kingdom, Allied bombing of German cities that caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, and the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. Regarding the latter, a later reflection attributed to a senior U.S. commander is brought up, according to which the Japanese were already willing to negotiate and there was no need to use “that horrible thing.”

Others qualify: Tokyo sought above all to protect the emperor, and the demanded unconditional surrender made that impossible. The use of all these analogies has the same old problem. They are deployed to justify or condemn, rarely to understand.

The count that doesn't add up

In the end, the arithmetic remains. One side says it shot down more projectiles than the other acknowledges launching. The other insists the attack hit all its targets. Figures grow, contradict each other, and no independent audit separates them. In an information war, the number is as much a weapon as the missile.

What is verifiable is that cities were left in the dark. How many of those hours without power are due to projectiles and how many to each side's narrative? For now, no statement answers that.