The Situation in the Ukraine. #24

The mortar position seems rather indiscrete and they didn't return fire. Who puts a motar position in the middle of a field ? Was this a training video, they got two shots for free against an open target.

"They are just mobilised"

"They are fighting against their will"

"They are forced to fight by their government"

"Brotherly nation"

"Ceasefire"

"Peace partners"

"Minsk"

"Vast majority are left and right liberals"

etc.

Yeah. Some of these statements clearly are hot air and cynical PR, BUT the frontline situation is not much different. I just hope there is a very good reason for the obvious media downplaying of the battles taking place during the "ceasefire". Because we have clear evidence that MLRS and tube artillery (Pions included), mortars and ATGMs are in action. And we have daily reports about NAF casualties. Which means that this inaction and apparent lack of effective response is starting to border on criminal incompetence and/or treason by both puppets in power of respective "republics" and Russia proper.

Like I have previously written: victories may be good for morale, media, PR and books; but battles of annihilation are far, far better. The fact is that the decision to not make all those previous encirclements the battles of annihilation was a decision by people pulling the strings. The opportunity and the capability were obviously there (witnessed by T-90 rampage and T-72B3 presence). Instead, thousands managed to flee to fight and kill another day, hundreds were taken prisoner only to be soon released (even the paramilitaries and volunteers).

I honestly don't understand the grand plan; and find it ever less likely that such a thing exists; sweeping the issue altogether under a rug until the situation changes and/or develops in a way that requires a different approach. You don't win conflicts this way, and the only way to stop bloodshed and this painful steady attrition was to deliver crippling blows and inflict irreplaceable losses. How can a ceasefire be reached when one side has the military means and political background to openly break it?

Quite puzzled at the moment, would be interested to hear your opinions.

Grazneyar wrote:The mortar position seems rather indiscrete and they didn't return fire. Who puts a motar position in the middle of a field ? Was this a training video, they got two shots for free against an open target.

There were other major failures and screw-ups, some can be seen at Lostarmour simply by looking at location and position of wrecks. Others like Debaltsevo and first battle of Donetsk Airport became obvious after going through post-battle reports.
Apparently, more emphasis is put on hunting some tribal beardies and other assorted scum in a distant country; than organising, leading and augmenting your own people's fight for their homes.

And to just think about all those braindead articles on Putin's nationalist and expansionist policies, Ukraine invasion armies and USSR revival plans. I originally thought that those writers were paid to write and think that way, but I steadily realised that a vast majority of journalists, analysts and think tank detritus writing them were actual, delusional true believers.

sepheronx wrote:

Cowboy's daughter wrote:No chance of NATO expansion for years, U.S. ambassador says


http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCAKCN0XJ1GM



NATO gave Georgia an open-ended promise of membership at a summit in April 2008 and other Balkan states such as Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina are keen on membership while Ukraine, which has battled Russian-backed separatists in its east since 2014, has also set its sights on joining.

Lute said the policy line for additional members remained open but all NATO's 28 allies had to agree on inviting new members and there was little likelihood of that.

"There's no way we're going to get consensus any time in the near future on adding ... Georgia or Ukraine," he said.

Funny, as Hig has pointed out their excuses.  Russia is a stable country with southern Caucuses states being a problem.  Outside of that, Ukraine being in NATO wouldn't cause any form of destabilization for the country.  On the contrary, it would further degrade Ukraine and cause more infighting of even greater proportions if they were accepted into NATO.  They are trying to make Russia the excuse when they know it is Ukraine that is the real problem.

Yes, I agree.

Anyone know, how Zaharchenko's online answering on questions from people in Kharkov went in April 20th? What was an effect in Kharkow and in 404 junta?

SturmGuard wrote:"They are just mobilised"

"They are fighting against their will"

"They are forced to fight by their government"

"Brotherly nation"

"Ceasefire"

"Peace partners"

"Minsk"

"Vast majority are left and right liberals"

etc.

Yeah. Some of these statements clearly are hot air and cynical PR, BUT the frontline situation is not much different. I just hope there is a very good reason for the obvious media downplaying of the battles taking place during the "ceasefire". Because we have clear evidence that MLRS and tube artillery (Pions included), mortars and ATGMs are in action. And we have daily reports about NAF casualties. Which means that this inaction and apparent lack of effective response is starting to border on criminal incompetence and/or treason by both puppets in power of respective "republics" and Russia proper.

Like I have previously written: victories may be good for morale, media, PR and books; but battles of annihilation are far, far better. The fact is that the decision to not make all those previous encirclements the battles of annihilation was a decision by people pulling the strings. The opportunity and the capability were obviously there (witnessed by T-90 rampage and T-72B3 presence). Instead, thousands managed to flee to fight and kill another day, hundreds were taken prisoner only to be soon released (even the paramilitaries and volunteers).

I honestly don't understand the grand plan; and find it ever less likely that such a thing exists; sweeping the issue altogether under a rug until the situation changes and/or develops in a way that requires a different approach. You don't win conflicts this way, and the only way to stop bloodshed and this painful steady attrition was to deliver crippling blows and inflict irreplaceable losses. How can a ceasefire be reached when one side has the military means and political background to openly break it?

Quite puzzled at the moment, would be interested to hear your opinions.

Hearts and mind for world public opinion http://tass.ru/en/world/871350

Preventing the Donbass from being over run. While attempting to show the world, it's an internal (civil war) Ukrainian problem as opposed to NATO and EU governments that support the Ukrainian government position that there are no Nazis or fascist nor problems between the Russian speaking and Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians. Only problems caused by the Russian government by meddling with agitators and military personnel.

franco wrote:

SturmGuard wrote:"They are just mobilised"

"They are fighting against their will"

"They are forced to fight by their government"

"Brotherly nation"

"Ceasefire"

"Peace partners"

"Minsk"

"Vast majority are left and right liberals"

etc.

Yeah. Some of these statements clearly are hot air and cynical PR, BUT the frontline situation is not much different. I just hope there is a very good reason for the obvious media downplaying of the battles taking place during the "ceasefire". Because we have clear evidence that MLRS and tube artillery (Pions included), mortars and ATGMs are in action. And we have daily reports about NAF casualties. Which means that this inaction and apparent lack of effective response is starting to border on criminal incompetence and/or treason by both puppets in power of respective "republics" and Russia proper.

Like I have previously written: victories may be good for morale, media, PR and books; but battles of annihilation are far, far better. The fact is that the decision to not make all those previous encirclements the battles of annihilation was a decision by people pulling the strings. The opportunity and the capability were obviously there (witnessed by T-90 rampage and T-72B3 presence). Instead, thousands managed to flee to fight and kill another day, hundreds were taken prisoner only to be soon released (even the paramilitaries and volunteers).

I honestly don't understand the grand plan; and find it ever less likely that such a thing exists; sweeping the issue altogether under a rug until the situation changes and/or develops in a way that requires a different approach. You don't win conflicts this way, and the only way to stop bloodshed and this painful steady attrition was to deliver crippling blows and inflict irreplaceable losses. How can a ceasefire be reached when one side has the military means and political background to openly break it?

Quite puzzled at the moment, would be interested to hear your opinions.

Hearts and mind for world public opinion  http://tass.ru/en/world/871350

Preventing the Donbass from being over run. While attempting to show the world, it's an internal (civil war) Ukrainian problem as opposed to NATO and EU governments that support the Ukrainian government position that there are no Nazis or fascist nor problems between the Russian speaking and Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians. Only problems caused by the Russian government by meddling with agitators and military personnel.  

+1

Russia upgrades the Black Sea Fleet

That is the part I disagree with. Why aim for the high opinions of historic and current rivals and enemies? Prior to Bolshevism, there was anti-Russian propaganda and activities from UK, over France to Germany and Austria, in differing degrees and times.

During Soviet times, the explanation was "anticommunism".

Guess what? The Soviet Union was no more, yet the historic enemies continued supporting and funding Chechens, Islamists, Ukrainian ultranationalism, NGOs, separatism, "human rights" and social degradation. Not to mention the "liberal reforms", "technocrats" and oligarchy. The derrogatory terms and articles, gloating and hipocrisy were there.

Take a look at the current Western narrative. Russia, embodied by Putin, "is aggresive", "revisionist" and "hostile".

Any sane person can remember the colour revolutions, NED grants, "democracy support" and where it led to. Orange Revolution was the moment things should have become obvious to everyone. The Georgian war left no doubts. Yet Maidan happened. And prior to Maidan, openly treasonous people roamed freely in Russia.

It doesn't have to seek confrontation, it is under a constant attack. In previous times, the coup instigation and sanctions would amount to a declaration of war.

Russia is a problem for them, because its combination of anti-relativism, social conservatism (in comparison to West), natural resources, nuclear and military capability makes it the only remaining European country still resisting. As it has been numerous times through history: vast territory, low population density and harsh climate prevent it from ever being the #1, but it was the one denying the would-be-hegemonistic powers: Napoleon, UK, Germans and USA.

The Russian Federation can gain respect by dealing with its enemies and allies: unmatched in defeating enemies, and unmatched in supporting allies. Not by trying to win hearts and minds of people raised and conditioned for a fight against it.

SturmGuard wrote:That is the part I disagree with. Why aim for the high opinions of historic and current rivals and enemies? Prior to Bolshevism, there was anti-Russian propaganda and activities from UK, over France to Germany and Austria, in differing degrees and times.

During Soviet times, the explanation was "anticommunism".

Guess what? The Soviet Union was no more, yet the historic enemies continued supporting and funding Chechens, Islamists, Ukrainian ultranationalism, NGOs, separatism, "human rights" and social degradation. Not to mention the "liberal reforms", "technocrats" and oligarchy. The derrogatory terms and articles, gloating and hipocrisy were there.

Take a look at the current Western narrative. Russia, embodied by Putin, "is aggresive", "revisionist" and "hostile".

Any sane person can remember the colour revolutions, NED grants, "democracy support" and where it led to. Orange Revolution was the moment things should have become obvious to everyone. The Georgian war left no doubts. Yet Maidan happened. And prior to Maidan, openly treasonous people roamed freely in Russia.

It doesn't have to seek confrontation, it is under a constant attack. In previous times, the coup instigation and sanctions would amount to a declaration of war.

Russia is a problem for them, because its combination of anti-relativism, social conservatism (in comparison to West), natural resources, nuclear and military capability makes it the only remaining European country still resisting. As it has been numerous times through history: vast territory, low population density and harsh climate prevent it from ever being the #1, but it was the one denying the would-be-hegemonistic powers: Napoleon, UK, Germans and USA.

The Russian Federation can gain respect by dealing with its enemies and allies: unmatched in defeating enemies, and unmatched in supporting allies. Not by trying to win hearts and minds of people raised and conditioned for a fight against it.

The key word there is "world". They know they are not going to change the minds of NATO and the EU governments, but it attacks and undermines the propaganda they present to their populace. And then there is the rest of the world.
Your option only proves that everything NATO and the EU states to be the truth.

What is the acceptable "cost" of that option? How many thousands dead? How much devastation and refugees? Appaling living conditions? What is this "the world"? Why do you think some Latin Americans, Indians, Chinese or Africans care about Russians and the truth of Western-Russian conflict? Would they help? Very, very unlikely.

SturmGuard wrote:What is the acceptable "cost" of that option? How many thousands dead? How much devastation and refugees? Appaling living conditions? What is this "the world"? Why do you think some Latin Americans, Indians, Chinese or Africans care about Russians and the truth of Western-Russian conflict? Would they help? Very, very unlikely.

The option is millions dead versus thousands dead...it is a world war being played out without direct military conflict. I'm in no hurry to see it reach that point.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Allegedly video of Ukrainian ATGM hitting DNR forces mortar position

Not allegedly, legit.  Also first ATGM gyro was fucked up. Probably old ATGM.

Ukrainians claim its Stugna-P in this video.

franco wrote:

SturmGuard wrote:What is the acceptable "cost" of that option? How many thousands dead? How much devastation and refugees? Appaling living conditions? What is this "the world"? Why do you think some Latin Americans, Indians, Chinese or Africans care about Russians and the truth of Western-Russian conflict? Would they help? Very, very unlikely.

The option is millions dead versus thousands dead...it is a world war being played out without direct military conflict. I'm in no hurry to see it reach that point.

I pretty much agree with that.

Militarov wrote:
Ukrainians claim its Stugna-P in this video.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/ukraine_ukrainian_army_vehicle_missile_system_uk/stugna_stugna-p_anti-tank_guided_missile_technical_data_sheet_specifications_description_information.html

Russia keeping the finacial pressure on. More at link

One of Ukraine's business tycoons Ihor Kolomoisky is among four prominent businessmen facing a $380 million worldwide freezing order that ties up property including his luxury French villa, months after he settled a multi-billion-pound claim in an unrelated case in British courts.

Ihor Kolomoisky and fellow billionaire Hennadiy Boholiubov are accused by Tatneft, a Russian oil company, of illegally seizing control of a refinery joint venture in Ukraine and siphoning hundreds of millions of dollars into their shell companies, according to documents filed at a London court. Two wealthy associates of the Ukrainians were named by state-controlled Tatneft in the suit that is seeking more than $334 million from the men.

http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/economic/339727.html

Militarov wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Allegedly video of Ukrainian ATGM hitting DNR forces mortar position

Not allegedly, legit.  Also first ATGM gyro was fucked up. Probably old ATGM.

Ukrainians claim its Stugna-P in this video.

Stugna P is supposed to be Laser beam riding GLATGM, the IR beacon should be super tiny. And launch pattern  should put the missile way higher at FP. The missile could be a Baryer/Shershen (RK-2/RK-3) used with the Skif module, but again laser beam means that the missile could not pull a grasshopper like that.

Also Ukropia can go and suck a dick, the system is .BY




The real Stugna is the second video. Ukropia is sooo shitty it is forced to use Belarussian clip for sales pitch.

Who finances Pukraine's 'Independent' media?

What a laughable joke from people who bury Ukrappy warcrimes underneath the rug...

Free expression and freedom of the media remains under threat in Crimea, Ukraine, OSCE Representative says

magnumcromagnon wrote:What a laughable joke from people who bury Ukrappy warcrimes underneath the rug...

Free expression and freedom of the media remains under threat in Crimea, Ukraine, OSCE Representative says

Funny, cause you can find videos of that one British guy who has gone to eastern Ukraine and were he was filming in Crimea asking people about the referendum and their opinions of being back with Russia.  It was good, and it is free, independent media.

I cant seem to find it, but there was an article somewhere (cannot remember where it was posted - if it was southfront, or Russia insider) about how people are questioning the OSCE and how they are operating.  Wish I could find it.

BTW, where did you find the screenshots above regarding who financed who? I need the link.

sepheronx wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:What a laughable joke from people who bury Ukrappy warcrimes underneath the rug...

Free expression and freedom of the media remains under threat in Crimea, Ukraine, OSCE Representative says

Funny, cause you can find videos of that one British guy who has gone to eastern Ukraine and were he was filming in Crimea asking people about the referendum and their opinions of being back with Russia.  It was good, and it is free, independent media.

I cant seem to find it, but there was an article somewhere (cannot remember where it was posted - if it was southfront, or Russia insider) about how people are questioning the OSCE and how they are operating.  Wish I could find it.

BTW, where did you find the screenshots above regarding who financed who?  I need the link.

Here's the link:

https://twitter.com/ValLisitsa/status/723734687039000576

BTW here's the mayor of Kiev, Quitali Clitorishko making a jackass out of himself:

From today's update

In addition, it is important to inform that we have received information from a reliable source in the General Staff of Ukraine that all the equipment, earlier stored in the Chernobyl NPP zone, is now delivered to the AFU combat units participating in the ATO. Before being delivered to the units, the equipment passed a formal restoration at repair plants of Ukraine. The documents of Ukrainian military command state that it is impossible to remove the radioactive background from the military equipment, it is delivered to the AFU combat units in that state. At the same time, in Ukraine. this information is classified with the highest level of secrecy.

https://dninews.com/article/donetsk-defense-situation-report-24042016

From Interfax. Think this was due in May.

President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko has reported that a sharp increase in a number of the volunteers to sign military service contracts with Ukraine's Armed Forces or with the other military formations has made it possible to suspend the seventh wave of mobilization.

"The fact that today over 23,000 Ukrainians have signed a contract to serve in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military units, has made it possible for me to not declare the next wave of mobilization. And I do my best to postpone [mobilization] to delay it as long as possible," Poroshenko said in an interview with Ukrainian TV channels on Sunday evening.

The president said salaries of servicemen this year have been increased - a motivation for many volunteers to sign the contracts.

"We compensated the fourth [demobilization] wave. We'll see how many new volunteers apply, if it's enough to demobilize the fifth wave of conscripts, which will occur under the terms foreseen by law, let's see," the head of state said.

At least, finally somebody came out and taught the scums a lesson.

http://sports.yahoo.com/video/scuffles-break-ukraines-azov-battalion-120627451.html

There is a video clip in the article.

Scuffles Break Out After Ukraine's Azov Battalion Destroys Lenin Statue in Odessa
by Storyful 3:56 mins

Scuffles broke out in the southern Ukrainian town of Lymanske, Odessa, on April 22, after members of the country’s volunteer Azov battalion destroyed a monument of Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin. The destruction of the statue coincided with the 146th anniversary of Lenin’s birth.In footage uploaded to YouTube on April 23, Azov battalion members are seen tying a cord, which is already attached to a minivan, around the head of the Lenin statue. The minivan then proceeds to pull the head and shoulders off the monument, allowing it to crash to the ground. Locals begin to argue with the soldiers until a scuffle breaks out and a police officer is forced to intervene. Credit: YouTube/Azov Battalion