Horus was loved and admired by those under him, even after he did all sorts of terrible things.
That said, being a "bad guy" almost always has a subjective, point of view component, rarely is simply a purely binomial state of affairs.
To use an example, at the risk of effectively "Godwin'ing" the thread to some degree, Stalin was by most people's accounts a "bad guy", but was widely admired by many citizens of the USSR even as he orchestrated the killing and repression of huge numbers of them. At the same time, it could be argued that both his presence/personality and the totalitarian state he built were necessary for the USSR to have survived and overcome the German invasion of the Soviet Union and that a more open and democratic state may have cracked and broken (as happened in most of western Europe) and that without him Hitler could have emerged victorious and that would have led to even greater slaughter and disaster.
So, yes, everything is subjective and related to a point of view and there are multiple sides to everything, but that still doesn't mean that being loved and admired disqualifies one from being a "bad guy".
I have to admit, he does look the part. But a proper villain usually is not greatly loved and admired by his own people.
Yes, because beloved, charismatic leaders have NEVER turned out to be evil donkey-caves.
Yes, Hitler was so beloved by his people that they staged multiple assassination attempts on him...
Hitler could only dream of having approval rates like Putin.
In general, once a charismatic leader starts being an evil donkey-cave, he usually stops being beloved.
His people didn't stage assassinations attempts on him, his generals did. For the general people, and until Germany started genuinely loosing the war in 1944, yes Hitler had very high approval ratings.
Also Mao, Stalin, all the Kim Jongs, Chavez, Castro, all of those staged the murder and torture of hundreds, thousands and millions of people and had the same type of approval ratings that Putin has amongst their respective peoples.
Pretty much only dictators ever achieve those types of approval ratings because only in dictatorships can the ruling class control the flow of information and silence the opposing voices so thoroughly and Russia today resembles a dictatorship in everything but the name.
Vaktathi wrote:but was widely admired by many citizens of the USSR
Not only WAS in USSR, also he IS considered mostly as good guy on post-Soviet region.
That a difference between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. First praise an individual, a single man, second are ready to sacrifice single man for the sake of a strong society.
Stalin is associated here mostly with order, power and progress, not with terror. Nowadays here is a proverb which can be hardly translated, but I think this should be correct: "One lack Stalin to induce you have order".
In any case, he is a very controversial and prominent figure in russian and world history, and cannot be judged just as good or bad guy. And anyone should ask himself, what would he do in that place, in that time, in that situation, if one wants to judge him.
IMHO since russians are collectivistic, democracy with western standards has no chance here. Also as in China and Arabia.
So I just ask you to take into account that people on other side of Earth can have absolutely different views on some things, even some fundamental things.
2 Iron_captain: combination of words "shades of gray" after one popular film sounds weird
Pretty much only dictators ever achieve those types of approval ratings because only in dictatorships can the ruling class control the flow of information and silence the opposing voices so thoroughly and Russia today resembles a dictatorship in everything but the name.
It makes me laughter when people believe that in totalitarian Russia media is controlled and in fact represents a propaganda, but eastern media are democratic and saying truth, not propaganda. Main goal of every media everywhere in every time was, is and will be to create required public opinion, not to say truth, and there is no difference what regime is in that country.
Your media is lying in familiar way to you so it looks weird to us, our news are lying in familiar way to us and weird way to you, because the target audience is different.
And stop thinking that people had that approval only because of government propaganda. Hitler created mighty industrial state on basis of depressed and ruined Germany after WW1, so strong that whole Europe was conquered. If Hitler was murdered in 1941-1943 he should be national hero of Germany for today.
About Stalin the best word said Isaac Deutscher (often people say that this is Churchill's words) : "...he found Russia working with wooden plows and left it equipped with atomic piles". Despite of GULAGs and propaganda there are many thing for what people loved him then and respect now.
It makes me laughter when people believe that in totalitarian Russia media is controlled and in fact represents a propaganda, but eastern media are democratic and saying truth, not propaganda. Main goal of every media everywhere in every time was, is and will be to create required public opinion, not to say truth, and there is no difference what regime is in that country.
Actually, once upon a time, media was about fact. It was a dim period between William R. Hearst and Rupert Murdoch, and typified by newsmen like Walter Cronkite.
Further, in this day and age, it's possible to use the internet to get a much broader view than before, meaning that the overall impact of national media is more limited. I don't watch American news, for example. (with the exception of Jon Stewart.)
Pretty much only dictators ever achieve those types of approval ratings because only in dictatorships can the ruling class control the flow of information and silence the opposing voices so thoroughly and Russia today resembles a dictatorship in everything but the name.
It makes me laughter when people believe that in totalitarian Russia media is controlled and in fact represents a propaganda, but eastern media are democratic and saying truth, not propaganda. Main goal of every media everywhere in every time was, is and will be to create required public opinion, not to say truth, and there is no difference what regime is in that country.
Your media is lying in familiar way to you so it looks weird to us, our news are lying in familiar way to us and weird way to you, because the target audience is different.
Except that western media has a very slight difference to Russian media: you have several conflicting opinions and views on practically everything, there is no unified message like there is in Russian media (or in the media of most dictatorships) and that allows people to make up their own minds about any given subject. But when all that everyone hears is the same message over and over, then that is what generates these high approval ratings... If no one is disagreeing with the great leader then that can only mean that he is right about everything, right?
Murdering and imprisoning you political opponents has the "unintended" side effect of making the ones that remain shut up and stop disagreeing with you.
And if you wan't to discuss relative media bias, call me when you have western reporters resigning their jobs because they can't stand the propaganda that their own network is spewing...
Russia on Tuesday warned the United States against sending a ballistic missile defence system to South Korea, saying it could threaten regional security.
Washington says it wants to deploy the system, known as THAAD, to South Korea as a deterrent to military provocation by North Korea.
"Such a development cannot but cause concern about the destructive influence of the United States' global missile defence on international security," Russia's foreign ministry said in a statement.
"In a region where the situation is already extremely complicated in terms of security, this could serve as another push toward an arms race in northeast Asia and further complicate any resolution of the nuclear issues on the Korean peninsula," the statement said.
China has also already warned that deployment of the system would undermine peace and stability in the region.
Faced with growing isolation from the West over the Ukraine crisis, Russia has moved to bolster ties with former Cold War-ally North Korea.
Moscow and Pyongyang have named 2015 a "year of friendship" between the two countries and the Kremlin says reclusive leader Kim Jong-Un is set to make his first official trip abroad to visit Russia's World War Two victory commemoration in May.
South Korea and the United States will launch a massive landing drill March 28 as the climax of an ongoing joint military exercise which North Korea views as an invasion rehearsal.
Putin (and the whole oil and trying to secure a port thing aside) aside, can someone explain to me the motivations of the pro-Ukraine and pro-Russian sides? Are they fighting for reasons more than nationalism?
As far as I see it, the pro-Russian side wants to join Russia, but don't actually want to go to Russia, and the pro-Ukrainian, want Ukraine to stay Ukraine.
I have to admit, he does look the part. But a proper villain usually is not greatly loved and admired by his own people.
Yes, because beloved, charismatic leaders have NEVER turned out to be evil donkey-caves.
Yes, Hitler was so beloved by his people that they staged multiple assassination attempts on him... Hitler could only dream of having approval rates like Putin. In general, once a charismatic leader starts being an evil donkey-cave, he usually stops being beloved.
Usually by people who knew what was going on (high ranking military), and even then those attempts were aimed to prevent Hitler from fething over Germany, because the man was a walking military catastrophe, not because he was a feth-sucking human gak-hook.
Considering that, it's entirely possible for Putin to be a feth-sucking human gak-hook AND be the circle-jerk idol for the Russian people.
Also, Hitler wouldn't have had to have dreamt to experience those sorts of approval ratings. In fact, Putin's approval ratings, depending on what year we're talking about, would have meant Hitler losing ground with the German people.
STOCKHOLM (AP) — The Swedish Air Force and NATO jets on Tuesday tracked four Russian combat aircraft flying with their transponders turned off over the Baltic Sea, officials said.
The Russian planes — two long-range, nuclear-capable Tu-22M3 bombers and two Sukhoi Su-27 fighters — were flying in international airspace, according to Sweden's Armed Forces and alliance sources.
NATO said it scrambled Danish jets and Italian jets based in Lithuania early Tuesday to identify the Russian aircraft which it said were heading to the Russian Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad.
"The Russian military aircraft did not use their onboard transponder; they were not in contact with civilian Air Traffic Control and they were not on a pre-filed flight plan," a NATO military officer said on condition he not be identified by name in keeping with alliance practice.
Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom said it was "unacceptable" for the Russian planes to be flying with shut-off transponders that are necessary for identifying aircraft on radar, calling it violation of international aviation rules.
"This has happened now on a number of occasions and in a very challenging way," Wallstrom told reporters in Stockholm. "We are tired of always having to protest against this kind of ... breach of rules."
NATO and Sweden, which is not a member of the alliance, have reported an increase in Russian air maneuvers over the Baltic Sea in recent years.
Tuesday's sighting comes as Finnish and Swedish military aircraft are preparing to train with U.S. fighters over the Baltic Sea, and American and NATO forces continue military exercises in the Baltic countries.
The Swedish military said the threat against Sweden had not grown but that the armed forces were watching the "increased activity" in the region.
I have to admit, he does look the part. But a proper villain usually is not greatly loved and admired by his own people.
Yes, because beloved, charismatic leaders have NEVER turned out to be evil donkey-caves.
Yes, Hitler was so beloved by his people that they staged multiple assassination attempts on him...
Hitler could only dream of having approval rates like Putin.
In general, once a charismatic leader starts being an evil donkey-cave, he usually stops being beloved.
Usually by people who knew what was going on (high ranking military), and even then those attempts were aimed to prevent Hitler from fething over Germany, because the man was a walking military catastrophe, not because he was a feth-sucking human gak-hook.
Considering that, it's entirely possible for Putin to be a feth-sucking human gak-hook AND be the circle-jerk idol for the Russian people.
Also, Hitler wouldn't have had to have dreamt to experience those sorts of approval ratings. In fact, Putin's approval ratings, depending on what year we're talking about, would have meant Hitler losing ground with the German people.
I would think that an even more relevant comparison between Putin and Hitler would be their goals more so than their domestic popularity. Putins move into Crimea and Ukraine isn't much different from Hitler's seizure of the Sudetenland and East Prussia and Danzig. As I understand it, Ukraine, especially in the eastern part and Crimea, has plenty of people who self identify as Russian be it ethnically, culturally or politically. That's not surprising given the history of the region. Putin's move into the Crimea and Ukraine has been justified as the liberating of Russians who want the Ukraine/Crimea to be a satelite state of Russia inside Russia's sphere of influence. It will likely be easier to contain Putin than Hitler because I doubt Putin wants to invade Europe after he achieves his goals in Crimea and the Ukraine.
I don't foresee the US or EU engaging in active combat in the Ukraine against Russia for the basically all the same reasons that NATO stayed out of Hungary in 1956.
A less violent political solution could have been worked out internally by the various Ukranian political factions if it hadn't been for some ham fisted diplomacy and interference in the Ukraine by the US and EU. A more deft foreign policy and a willingness to keep Western involvement to a level of economic and political involvement just enough to counter balance Russia's influence to ensure Ukrainian self determination without trying to reach the unachievable goal of creating a Ukraine that could actively oppose Russian interests would have better served everyone.
Co'tor Shas wrote: As far as I see it, the pro-Russian side wants to join Russia, but don't actually want to go to Russia, and the pro-Ukrainian, want Ukraine to stay Ukraine.
Lol no, I get that.
But for the people, what's the difference between joining Russia or not?
Originally I thought economics, social freedoms, etc. but the more I look at it, the more the two sides look the same.
BUCHAREST, Romania -- Britain's defense secretary says NATO members Romania and Britain will not be intimidated by threats against members of the military alliance.
"Neither Romania nor Britain will be intimidated by threats to its alliance or its members," Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said Monday during a one-day visit.
His remarks came days after Russia's ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said in a published report that Danish warships could become targets for Russian nuclear missiles if the Danes join the alliance's missile defense system. Bases are planned in the southern Romanian town of Deveselu and in Poland.
"I do not think Danes fully understand the consequences of what happens if Denmark joins the U.S.-led missile defense. If this happens, Danish warships become targets for Russian nuclear missiles," Vanin was quoted as saying by the newspaper Jyllands-Posten on Saturday.
Should Danes join "we risk considering each other as enemies," he added.
I wonder if Putin understands that diplomacy involves a carrot as well as a ten megaton stick?
A less violent political solution could have been worked out internally by the various Ukranian political factions if it hadn't been for some ham fisted diplomacy and interference in the Ukraine by the US and EU. A more deft foreign policy and a willingness to keep Western involvement to a level of economic and political involvement just enough to counter balance Russia's influence to ensure Ukrainian self determination without trying to reach the unachievable goal of creating a Ukraine that could actively oppose Russian interests would have better served everyone.
Unfortunately, It's hard to create good, balanced diplomacy when troops are already on the move, and have already annexed a big chunk of the country your negotiating with. They tend to scream for aid and troops and all the guns you can do.
Co'tor Shas wrote: As far as I see it, the pro-Russian side wants to join Russia, but don't actually want to go to Russia, and the pro-Ukrainian, want Ukraine to stay Ukraine.
Lol no, I get that.
But for the people, what's the difference between joining Russia or not?
Originally I thought economics, social freedoms, etc. but the more I look at it, the more the two sides look the same.
They are essentially the same with the difference that Ukraine is even more fethed up.
KiloFiX wrote: I'm so confused about the different sides.
Putin (and the whole oil and trying to secure a port thing aside) aside, can someone explain to me the motivations of the pro-Ukraine and pro-Russian sides? Are they fighting for reasons more than nationalism?
Ukraine depicts Russia as bloodthirsty evil empire that stands behind all the bad stuff going on in their country and Russia depicts Ukraine as crazy nazi who want to oppress and eventually eliminate russian (nationality) civilians.
It's hard to tell what's going on - there's heavy propaganda involved on both sides. What we know for sure is that there's currently civil war in the North-East of Ukraine.
Ukraine governor Kolomoisky sacked after oil firm row http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32045990 Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko has sacked Ihor Kolomoisky - the billionaire governor of the key industrial region of Dnipropetrovsk.
It comes after armed men suspected of links to Mr Kolomoisky briefly occupied the offices of a state-owned oil firm in the capital Kiev.
Mr Kolomoisky was reportedly unhappy after parliament passed legislation aimed at weakening his influence.
Correspondents say the dispute could affect the conflict in the east.
It triggered fears of a major showdown between the tycoon and the state.
Ultimatum n a statement released early on Wednesday, Mr Poroshenko's office named Valentyn Reznichenko as the new acting governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region.
It also quoted the president as saying during the talks with Mr Kolomoisky that the region - a centre of heavy industry - should remain "a bastion of Ukraine in the east and protect the peace".
Mr Kolomoisky - who is estimated to be worth more than $2bn (£1.3bn) - has been widely credited with helping bring order in Dnipropetrovsk and halt the advance of pro-Russian rebels further to the east.
He is also financing a number of Ukrainian battalions fighting the separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk region.
His dismissal comes days after armed men suspected of acting on orders from the oligarch briefly seized the headquarters of the Ukrnafta energy company and its subsidiary UkrTransNafta.
The armed men - whom Mr Kolomoisky said were from a private security firm - left the buildings after an ultimatum was issued by the central government.
Mr Kolomoisky claimed the armed men had tried to ward off an illegal takeover of Ukrnafta, in which the tycoon has a 42% stake. The state owns the rest of the oil and gas giant.
This happened after Ukraine's parliament had approved amendments to a law on state-owned companies that experts said effectively removed Mr Kolomoisky's control over Ukrnafta.
Starting something like that with an EU country would lead to all sorts of Cold War style crap starting up in response I think. I foresee things being ramped up anyway, but something like that may be a bit too close to home for most Europeans. ...Though Ukraine was pretty close as well.
Ah, but yeah, the Russian government must be aware that they're going out of the way to Godwin the hell out of themselves at this point. Not that they care much. =P
The US has supplied the Ukrainian government with armoured Humvees apparently. No guns, but its not like a PKM's too hard to come by. An indication of a ramping up in foreign involvement? ...Not that the US doesn't have plenty of these things to spare anyway (more so with the wind down in Afghanistan and the move to newer types of vehicles).
Edit: This comes after they bought up a gakton of old Saxons from the British btw. I'm wondering how much of a discount they were given? ...Especially given the Saxon's accident history since they've been deployed.
Not going to happen. First of all, Poland is a stable country. The kind of sneaky annexation Russia did in Ukraine only works in unstable countries. Unless there would be a major destabilising event in Poland, such a thing is not going to work. Secondly, Poland has no Russian minority, so there would be no local support which is necessary for the hybrid warfare Russia used in Ukraine. Thirdly, why in Heaven's name would Putin ever want to attack Poland? There is absolutely nothing about Poland that relates to Russia's national interests in any way. The Poles have gone mad. (altough with their history, I can't blame them for being so suspicious to Russia)
BaronIveagh wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Poland says they believe that Russia is gearing up for the same hybrid warfare against them.
The only one godwinning the thread is you. Stop making comparisons that make no sense whatsoever. It makes you look dumb and ignorant of history and the present situation.
Wyrmalla wrote: The US has supplied the Ukrainian government with armoured Humvees apparently. No guns, but its not like a PKM's too hard to come by. An indication of a ramping up in foreign involvement? ...Not that the US doesn't have plenty of these things to spare anyway (more so with the wind down in Afghanistan and the move to newer types of vehicles).
Edit: This comes after they bought up a gakton of old Saxons from the British btw. I'm wondering how much of a discount they were given? ...Especially given the Saxon's accident history since they've been deployed.
Not going to happen. First of all, Poland is a stable country. The kind of sneaky annexation Russia did in Ukraine only works in unstable countries. Unless there would be a major destabilising event in Poland, such a thing is not going to work.
Secondly, Poland has no Russian minority, so there would be no local support which is necessary for the hybrid warfare Russia used in Ukraine.
Thirdly, why in Heaven's name would Putin ever want to attack Poland? There is absolutely nothing about Poland that relates to Russia's national interests in any way. The Poles have gone mad. (altough with their history, I can't blame them for being so suspicious to Russia)
Sooo... why is Putin building up his military forces on the Polish border and moving theater level strategic weapons into place? Why is the government controlled media starting to slam the Poles? Hybrid warfare isn't about a Russian minority. It's about putting special forces and similar troops into play with a flimsy excuse, but enough of one to keep your nose clean. You don't need a destabilized country, you can make a stable country unstable... with a convenient rebellion say. This method of warfare is not new to Russian. It used be called Maskirovka. It's very, very clear that Putin, a former intelligence officer himself, has not forgotten this long standing peacetime and wartime tactic.
Let's all be clear. Russian troops have been in Ukraine, all over the fighting since this little "game" started. I'd wonder how much of the "rebel" forces are actually rebels. A lot of them are geared a lot like... Russian army soldiers, but there's just enough of a cover that no one can cry foul till solid evidence can be extracted. It's a beautiful execution of the strategy really.
But there have a been a few occasions were the Ukranian Army had the upper hand only to be stomped by the rebels. I believe that this defeats have been at the hands of Russians forces.
Also I really doubt that Russia is going to invade Poland for the reasons Iron_Captain mentioned. But better be prepared and paranoid.
I don't think they are either actually, but they're going to make it look like they are. Maybe even stir up a "rebellion". It's not really that Poland is a member of the EU. Poland is a member of NATO. Get NATO and the U.S. focusing away from Eastern Europe, looking towards ensuring the sovereignty of a NATO member... well. Who knows what can happen when the sheepdog's in another pasteur?
Or maybe Putin's going to go whole hog with a quick alpha strike in an attempt to recapture the bulk of the Warsaw Pact countries.
I think the latter's rather unlikely, but I don't doubt that strategic scenario is being discussed.
That's easy enough to fix, it's probably just the basic factory paint. German tanks in WW2 operated on the Eastern Front in many of the same areas with a not-too-dissimilar base color called "Panzer Yellow". Fits into wheat fields, dirt trails, etc pretty ok.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I don't think they are either actually, but they're going to make it look like they are. Maybe even stir up a "rebellion". It's not really that Poland is a member of the EU. Poland is a member of NATO. Get NATO and the U.S. focusing away from Eastern Europe, looking towards ensuring the sovereignty of a NATO member... well. Who knows what can happen when the sheepdog's in another pasteur?
Or maybe Putin's going to go whole hog with a quick alpha strike in an attempt to recapture the bulk of the Warsaw Pact countries.
I think the latter's rather unlikely, but I don't doubt that strategic scenario is being discussed.
Realistically, Russia doesn't have resources to wage a full-scale war against any western alliance. It probably does have resources to blast everyone to the orbit with nuclear weaponry but than you don't need to bolster the border too hard, do you?
Anywayz, Poland and Russia have long-going historical issues against each other. And anti-russian rhetoric is quite popular in Poland afaik. Especially since Poland's break-free from being a soviet satellite.
The only one godwinning the thread is you. Stop making comparisons that make no sense whatsoever. It makes you look dumb and ignorant of history and the present situation.
Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Interfere in a civil war under the guise of 'volunteers' who just happen to have left the army with all their gear, including tanks, aircraft, and warships?
Check.
Have radical right wing extremists bump off prominent opposition figures and claim to be shocked and horrified and taking a direct hand in the 'investigation'?
Check.
Threaten Denmark possibly in an effort to isolate other countries from their allies in preparation for a military campaign?
Check.
Start laying the groundwork for a campaign against Poland.
Check, and REALLY?????
At what point would you say it would be fair to make the comparison? When he declares the dawn of a thousand year Russian Empire? Puts on a brown shirt with a red arm band and has everyone saying 'Hail Putin!'?
Not going to happen. First of all, Poland is a stable country. The kind of sneaky annexation Russia did in Ukraine only works in unstable countries. Unless there would be a major destabilising event in Poland, such a thing is not going to work.
Secondly, Poland has no Russian minority, so there would be no local support which is necessary for the hybrid warfare Russia used in Ukraine.
Thirdly, why in Heaven's name would Putin ever want to attack Poland? There is absolutely nothing about Poland that relates to Russia's national interests in any way. The Poles have gone mad. (altough with their history, I can't blame them for being so suspicious to Russia)
Actually Poland does have a Russian minority, according to the 2011 census. Not a big one, mind you, but they do have one. That doesn't matter much though. Produce a 'Polish' one to distance yourself from it a bit by recruiting unhappy and disenfranchised members of polish society, arm, train, and supply them, and then let them loose. Putin has run similar operations back when he was a KGB officer.
As KM points out, it's quite easy to destabilize a country. Russia and the United States have done it for years.
I'm up to date with all my podcasts and not got much going on at the moment.
We should just declare war and have done with it all
In all seriousness though, we're sort of supposed to anyway, Ukraine relinquished it's nuclear arsenal under an understanding that NATO would defend their sovereignty, well Ukraine territory is now in Russian hands...
I doubt it would be if Ukraine did still have had it's nukes.
At the very least I wouldn't blame the old Soviet territories if they wanted to re-arm themselves.
If war did come I wonder who would press the big red button first. Either way all participants are certain to be destroyed , I can't imagine either side really doing it.
The only one godwinning the thread is you. Stop making comparisons that make no sense whatsoever. It makes you look dumb and ignorant of history and the present situation.
Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Have radical right wing extremists bump off prominent opposition figures and claim to be shocked and horrified and taking a direct hand in the 'investigation'?
Check.
As KM points out, it's quite easy to destabilize a country. Russia and the United States have done it for years.
And don't forget going in to remove weapons of mass destruction
koooaei wrote: It's hard to call russians a 'minority' when it comes to Ukraine.
For example, there are ~60% russians and only ~25% ukranians living in Crimea.
Something similar goes for Donbass too.
And according to a poll done in Kiev, 50% of the west Ukraines population, isn't behind them either.
The oligarchs are already arguing amongst each other..
I'm up to date with all my podcasts and not got much going on at the moment.
We should just declare war and have done with it all
In all seriousness though, we're sort of supposed to anyway, Ukraine relinquished it's nuclear arsenal under an understanding that NATO would defend their sovereignty, well Ukraine territory is now in Russian hands...
I doubt it would be if Ukraine did still have had it's nukes.
At the very least I wouldn't blame the old Soviet territories if they wanted to re-arm themselves.
If war did come I wonder who would press the big red button first. Either way all participants are certain to be destroyed , I can't imagine either side really doing it.
The internet troll army’s selling of the Kremlin’s parallel universe to the Russian people and to a skeptical Western audience is a matter of life and death for the Putin regime. If the Russian people do not buy their story, Putin loses the high “ratings” on which his regime rests. If he cannot convince his Western audience, Europe and the United States will take actions that spoil his Novorossiya ventures and threaten his regime. Trolling is a high stakes business that Putin takes seriously and the West must not underestimate.
Germany’s Angela Merkel described Russian President Vladimir Putin, after a phone conversation, as “living in another world.” Like Merkel, we, who write on Russia’s War on Ukraine, have all had our rude introduction to Putin’s “other world.” In his parallel universe, the aggressor is the victim, strangers appoint themselves “premiers” of non-existent “republics,” hundreds of soldiers mysteriously perish in border exercises or “on vacation,” a certified nationally elected government is a “neo-Nazi junta,” and hundreds of tanks and heavy weapons crossing borders are optical illusions.
Putin’s trolls describe the Kremlin’s other world
Putin’s Alice-in-Wonderland can be wacky, mind boggling, irritating, disgusting, cynical, and incorrigible, but underlying it is a sinister narrative of an alternate reality, cleverly designed to promote Putin’s goals and head off effective Western actions.
Putin has used a troll army throughout his presidency that went largely unnoticed prior to the Crimean invasion. The Kremlin indeed requires an “army” to construct a new universe parallel to the “real universe” in which we live. Google GOOGL -1.8% counts 1.5 million media entries under “Putin attacks Ukraine.” The trolls must convince their audience that the Google entry should read instead “Ukraine attacks Russia.” Quite a job!
According to a Buzzfeed account, each troll is expected to post 50 news articles daily and maintain six Facebook and ten Twitter accounts, with 50 tweets per day. At these rates, a small army of one thousand trolls will post 100,000 news articles and tweets per day. The Kremlin does not spare the cash. In a time of austerity, the budget for “participation in the international information space” is scheduled to rise to some $250 million in the next couple of years.
But remember: In Putin’s parallel universe, there is no troll army. They are a fantasy of Western paranoia. It is, however, a fact that these “non-existent” trolls overwhelm “comments” sections of media to render meaningful dialogue impossible. The Guardian’s editor reported 40,000 comments a day by an “orchestrated pro-Kremlin campaign” of pro-Russia trolling on Ukraine stories. Harassed by the flood, some publications have decided to close their comments sections, as the Moscow Times informed its readers:
“Due to the increasing number of users engaging in personal attacks, spam, trolling and abusive comments, we are no longer able to host our forum as a site for constructive and intelligent debate. It is with regret, therefore, that we have found ourselves forced to suspend the commenting function on our articles.”
PhantomViper wrote: This is a bit old news, but it sheds some light on the recent change in EU policy and some might even say on some posters here on Dakka as well!
The internet troll army’s selling of the Kremlin’s parallel universe to the Russian people and to a skeptical Western audience is a matter of life and death for the Putin regime. If the Russian people do not buy their story, Putin loses the high “ratings” on which his regime rests. If he cannot convince his Western audience, Europe and the United States will take actions that spoil his Novorossiya ventures and threaten his regime. Trolling is a high stakes business that Putin takes seriously and the West must not underestimate.
Germany’s Angela Merkel described Russian President Vladimir Putin, after a phone conversation, as “living in another world.” Like Merkel, we, who write on Russia’s War on Ukraine, have all had our rude introduction to Putin’s “other world.” In his parallel universe, the aggressor is the victim, strangers appoint themselves “premiers” of non-existent “republics,” hundreds of soldiers mysteriously perish in border exercises or “on vacation,” a certified nationally elected government is a “neo-Nazi junta,” and hundreds of tanks and heavy weapons crossing borders are optical illusions.
Putin’s trolls describe the Kremlin’s other world
Putin’s Alice-in-Wonderland can be wacky, mind boggling, irritating, disgusting, cynical, and incorrigible, but underlying it is a sinister narrative of an alternate reality, cleverly designed to promote Putin’s goals and head off effective Western actions.
Putin has used a troll army throughout his presidency that went largely unnoticed prior to the Crimean invasion. The Kremlin indeed requires an “army” to construct a new universe parallel to the “real universe” in which we live. Google GOOGL -1.8% counts 1.5 million media entries under “Putin attacks Ukraine.” The trolls must convince their audience that the Google entry should read instead “Ukraine attacks Russia.” Quite a job!
According to a Buzzfeed account, each troll is expected to post 50 news articles daily and maintain six Facebook and ten Twitter accounts, with 50 tweets per day. At these rates, a small army of one thousand trolls will post 100,000 news articles and tweets per day. The Kremlin does not spare the cash. In a time of austerity, the budget for “participation in the international information space” is scheduled to rise to some $250 million in the next couple of years.
But remember: In Putin’s parallel universe, there is no troll army. They are a fantasy of Western paranoia. It is, however, a fact that these “non-existent” trolls overwhelm “comments” sections of media to render meaningful dialogue impossible. The Guardian’s editor reported 40,000 comments a day by an “orchestrated pro-Kremlin campaign” of pro-Russia trolling on Ukraine stories. Harassed by the flood, some publications have decided to close their comments sections, as the Moscow Times informed its readers:
“Due to the increasing number of users engaging in personal attacks, spam, trolling and abusive comments, we are no longer able to host our forum as a site for constructive and intelligent debate. It is with regret, therefore, that we have found ourselves forced to suspend the commenting function on our articles.”
BaronIveagh wrote: Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Negative. Also blaming someone in that, first remember how USA protected Cuba, Dominicana, Grenada, Panama etc. That's why whataboutory annoys you.
BaronIveagh wrote: Interfere in a civil war under the guise of 'volunteers' who just happen to have left the army with all their gear, including tanks, aircraft, and warships?
Check.
Negative. If you want to find russian, you will find them everywhere. Kolomoyskyi even found them in Kiev in Ukrnafta (Ukraininan Oil company) office. And what about non-ukrainian soldiers fighting on Ukrainian side with NATO wargear?
BaronIveagh wrote: Have radical right wing extremists bump off prominent opposition figures and claim to be shocked and horrified and taking a direct hand in the 'investigation'?
Check.
I do not excuse murder, but is it Nemtsov a prominent opposition figure???
BaronIveagh wrote: Start laying the groundwork for a campaign against Poland.
Check, and REALLY?????
Negative. Like 50 years ago, you can do anything you want under the slogan "Ivans are coming". Weaponry manufacturers are particularly pleased. I think if Putin tomorrow coughs in the direction of Poland or the Baltic States it will be announced as bacteriological attack. Again, if you want to see russians preparing invasion to Poland - you will see it.
P.S. do not strain to call me kremlin propagandist, I have already guessed.
BaronIveagh wrote: Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Negative. Also blaming someone in that, first remember how USA protected Cuba, Dominicana, Grenada, Panama etc. That's why whataboutory annoys you.
Are Russian soldiers on Ukranian soil without being invited by the Ukranian government? Yes? Then they invaded.
The USA has a long and well documented history of meddling in other countries affairs. I fail to see how that makes Russia's equally long and well documented history not exist.
BaronIveagh wrote: Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Negative. Also blaming someone in that, first remember how USA protected Cuba, Dominicana, Grenada, Panama etc. That's why whataboutory annoys you.
Are Russian soldiers on Ukranian soil without being invited by the Ukranian government? Yes? Then they invaded.
The USA has a long and well documented history of meddling in other countries affairs. I fail to see how that makes Russia's equally long and well documented history not exist.
Are Russian soldiers on Ukranian soil?
I mentioned those countries because it looks strange to me why people accuse some countries in meddling in other countries when their own state does the same in modern history.
And there is only one documented case of russian regular soldiers intervening ukrainian border - 10 soldiers in august 2014 iirc.
BaronIveagh wrote: Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group.... check.
Negative. Also blaming someone in that, first remember how USA protected Cuba, Dominicana, Grenada, Panama etc. That's why whataboutory annoys you.
Are Russian soldiers on Ukranian soil without being invited by the Ukranian government? Yes? Then they invaded.
The USA has a long and well documented history of meddling in other countries affairs. I fail to see how that makes Russia's equally long and well documented history not exist.
One could argue that Yanukovich is still the legitimate leader of the Ukrainian government and he invited the Russians.
I mentioned those countries because it looks strange to me why people accuse some countries in meddling in other countries when their own state does the same in modern history.
Whataboutism really has to be the most linked page in this thread. I'll never cease to be amazed at how the concept doesn't want to die.
BaronIveagh wrote: Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Negative. Also blaming someone in that, first remember how USA protected Cuba, Dominicana, Grenada, Panama etc. That's why whataboutory annoys you.
Are Russian soldiers on Ukranian soil without being invited by the Ukranian government? Yes? Then they invaded.
The USA has a long and well documented history of meddling in other countries affairs. I fail to see how that makes Russia's equally long and well documented history not exist.
One could argue that Yanukovich is still the legitimate leader of the Ukrainian government and he invited the Russians.
He's not the only person in charge of the country. He might be president but that doesn't mean he gets to invite another country's armed forces in without the consent of anyone else in government. Anyway, by fleeing the country instead he can be considered to have abandoned his post.
I mentioned those countries because it looks strange to me why people accuse some countries in meddling in other countries when their own state does the same in modern history.
Whataboutism really has to be the most linked page in this thread. I'll never cease to be amazed at how the concept doesn't want to die.
I was really surprised that you have special word for this and so dislike it.
Seeing such irritation when referring to a precedent means just one: what is allowed to right states is not allowed to another. And blaming someone in whataboutism is nice way to escape. It so easy to skip whole post and see only "what about..."
I mentioned those countries because it looks strange to me why people accuse some countries in meddling in other countries when their own state does the same in modern history.
Whataboutism really has to be the most linked page in this thread. I'll never cease to be amazed at how the concept doesn't want to die.
I was really surprised that you have special word for this and so dislike it.
Seeing such irritation when referring to a precedent means just one: what is allowed to right states is not allowed to another. And blaming someone in whataboutism is nice way to escape. It so easy to skip whole post and see only "what about..."
No one's preventing you from making a thread on the evils perpetrated by other nations, but this thread deals with the situation in Ukraine, where Russia is very much involved, one way or another. Accusing ME of deflecting when all I've done is point out that you're deflecting is dishonest, to say the least.
For the record, strawmen generally isn't very polite either: I never said that anything was "allowed".
Asadjud wrote: [Negative. Also blaming someone in that, first remember how USA protected Cuba, Dominicana, Grenada, Panama etc. That's why whataboutory annoys you.
Incorrect: Putin has stated that's exactly why Russia has become involved.
Hopeful;ly one day the forum programmers will do me the favor of adding at least
to the many national flags our forums sport.
Until such time, I have to deal with people assuming I'm an US national and that complaining as if US foreign policy has some relevancy to me beyond what bs they're pulling on us this week.
Asadjud wrote: [
And what about non-ukrainian soldiers fighting on Ukrainian side with NATO wargear?
Show me one with identifiable unit markings. The Russians have been slipping up and leaving their unit insignias on things, and getting spotted, as was posted earlier in the thread. I also have to ask what you think is NATO equipment. Because older stuff can be bought on the open market, just as you can buy older Russian gear the same way.
Asadjud wrote: [
Again, if you want to see russians preparing invasion to Poland - you will see it.
Well, producing huge amounts of negative propaganda about the target, massing troops and equipment on the boarder, having your spies caught and spilling the beans, and having your leader, one V Putin, make threatening comments about invading Poland, Romania, and so on is about as clear as it gets before a war declaration and troops arrive.
However, Putin has learned from past mistakes, and, if done correctly, you actually won't see it. Instead you'd see a rise in domestic terrorism, sabotage, and other efforts to incite unrest.
Asadjud wrote: [
P.S. do not strain to call me kremlin propagandist, I have already guessed.
If you were, you'd have been shot for being so unsubtle about your views on the matter.
And what about non-ukrainian soldiers fighting on Ukrainian side with NATO wargear?
Show me one with identifiable unit markings. The Russians have been slipping up and leaving their unit insignias on things, and getting spotted, as was posted earlier in the thread. I also have to ask what you think is NATO equipment. Because older stuff can be bought on the open market, just as you can buy older Russian gear the same way.
Yeah, there's a lot being made of many Ukrainian soldiers/volunteers wearing stuff from NATO countries, but it's all surplus available to buy on the internet without any significant restrictions. Even the Russian report on M4-style carbines being found is suspect when Russia is known to not only have captured a large number of Bushmaster knock-off's from the Georgian conflict, but there are actual Russian factories making AR style rifles, in fact here's Medvedev with an Orsis M4-style carbine[ made in Moscow
There have been units fighting on the side of the DPR with the emblems of the Russian Marines, post-soviet weapons that are not contained in Ukrainian arsenals for defectors to have taken, and other incidents, the likes of which have not occurred anything near as blatantly on the Ukrainian side.
Now, are there foreign volunteers on both sides? Absolutely. Are there undercover NATO troops on the Ukrainian side? Extremely doubtful.
A big pointer is that, at least if there are, they're not being killed, there's no whiff of any NATO personnel coming home in body bags. There are a number of issues with people ostensibly serving in the Russian armed forces coming back across the border for burial and things getting real awkward. There's been some explanations about guys volunteering while "On leave" or deserting to go fight, but that would be extremely out of character for the control the Russian military exerts over individual soldiers and indicate a pronounced lack of discipline which I don't think exists.
VICE news did some great work on that issue. Now, granted they're still "western" media and take is as you will, but they've gotten far deeper than pretty much anything else I've seen, they show when both sides do terrible things and give both sides lots of camera time, including actively engaging with DNR fighters and officials. Here's their video on the issue of Russian servicemen.
And what about non-ukrainian soldiers fighting on Ukrainian side with NATO wargear?
Show me one with identifiable unit markings. The Russians have been slipping up and leaving their unit insignias on things, and getting spotted, as was posted earlier in the thread. I also have to ask what you think is NATO equipment. Because older stuff can be bought on the open market, just as you can buy older Russian gear the same way.
Yeah, there's a lot being made of many Ukrainian soldiers/volunteers wearing stuff from NATO countries, but it's all surplus available to buy on the internet without any significant restrictions. Even the Russian report on M4-style carbines being found is suspect when Russia is known to not only have captured a large number of Bushmaster knock-off's from the Georgian conflict, but there are actual Russian factories making AR style rifles, in fact here's Medvedev with an Orsis M4-style carbine[ made in Moscow
There have been units fighting on the side of the DPR with the emblems of the Russian Marines, post-soviet weapons that are not contained in Ukrainian arsenals for defectors to have taken, and other incidents, the likes of which have not occurred anything near as blatantly on the Ukrainian side.
You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
Also, most of post-soviet Russian weapons are exported to other countries and freely available on the black market. They can be seen in the Syrian War as well. Does that mean ISIS fighters are actually Russian soldiers as well? It must be, according to Western media logic...
The only one godwinning the thread is you. Stop making comparisons that make no sense whatsoever. It makes you look dumb and ignorant of history and the present situation.
Let's see, invade another country, and claim you're doing so to protect an ethnic group....
check.
Yes, like Hitler and Putin are the only leaders in all of world history to have ever done so... It is one of the most common casus belli.
BaronIveagh wrote: Interfere in a civil war under the guise of 'volunteers' who just happen to have left the army with all their gear, including tanks, aircraft, and warships?
Check.
Now they have warships and aircraft too? The lies get more weird every day. The seperatists have only few tanks compared to the Ukrainian army, let alone ships and aircraft... Also, I don't recall Hitler having done such a thing. afaik, the German army was not very subtle in its invasions, preferring Blitzkrieg over covert operations.
BaronIveagh wrote: Have radical right wing extremists bump off prominent opposition figures and claim to be shocked and horrified and taking a direct hand in the 'investigation'?
Check.
Nemtsov has been made a prominent opposition figure suddenly? I was not aware. So every time a opposition figure is murdered and the murder is subsequently investigated by authorities, it makes the leader of the country in which that happened look like Hitler?
BaronIveagh wrote: Threaten Denmark possibly in an effort to isolate other countries from their allies in preparation for a military campaign?
Check.
Russia has always been threatening others to get its way, because Russia has more hard than soft power. Stalin, the Tsars and Sweden also threatened and even invaded Denmark. Were they all Hitlers too? Certainly, of all the millions of things Hitler did in his life, threatening Denmark is one of the things one must do to look like Hitler, rather than all the things Hitler has done and became infamous for.
BaronIveagh wrote: Start laying the groundwork for a campaign against Poland.
Check, and REALLY?????
Firstly, Putin is not doing such a thing. Secondly, even if he did, invading Poland was already in vogue centuries before Hitler was born. Poland is likely the most invaded country in world history.
BaronIveagh wrote: At what point would you say it would be fair to make the comparison? When he declares the dawn of a thousand year Russian Empire? Puts on a brown shirt with a red arm band and has everyone saying 'Hail Putin!'?
Yes, if you combine that with building extermination camps to exterminate entire ethnic groups. Those are things that were pretty much unique to Hitler, so if Putin were to do that, you could make a few valid comparisons. All of the stuff you listed above has been done by many people beside Hitler and thus is not a valid ground for a comparison. Of course, if you want to go down this road, I can play the game too.
Hitler ate food, slept in a bed, liked movies and was suspicous of Russian invasions.
You eat food, sleep in a bed, like movies and are suspicous of Russian invasions. Those are some remarkable similarities, Adolf...
Not going to happen. First of all, Poland is a stable country. The kind of sneaky annexation Russia did in Ukraine only works in unstable countries. Unless there would be a major destabilising event in Poland, such a thing is not going to work.
Secondly, Poland has no Russian minority, so there would be no local support which is necessary for the hybrid warfare Russia used in Ukraine.
Thirdly, why in Heaven's name would Putin ever want to attack Poland? There is absolutely nothing about Poland that relates to Russia's national interests in any way. The Poles have gone mad. (altough with their history, I can't blame them for being so suspicious to Russia)
Actually Poland does have a Russian minority, according to the 2011 census. Not a big one, mind you, but they do have one. That doesn't matter much though. Produce a 'Polish' one to distance yourself from it a bit by recruiting unhappy and disenfranchised members of polish society, arm, train, and supply them, and then let them loose. Putin has run similar operations back when he was a KGB officer.
As KM points out, it's quite easy to destabilize a country. Russia and the United States have done it for years.
And why would Putin ever want to do such a thing? Next thing you know they are going to claim Putin wants to invade Ireland.
You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
You can, but you're not seeing Ukrainian units with the same sort of gear. Were it just fatigues and older camo patterns, I'd agree with you. Seeing the right-wing Ukrainian volunteer groups in German camo that sometimes has German flags still on it is awkward, but you can tell it's very old just like many of the DPR units wearing late 80's era patterns that often still have Soviet iconography on them. However we aren't seeing the modernity or specificity on the Ukrainian side the way you are on the Russian stuff. You aren't seeing things like "GSG 9" or "US MARINES" on MARPAT camo on the Ukrainian gear the way we're sometimes seeing Russian equivalents on the other side. At least that I've seen.
It's the gap in modernity and the specificity of the stuff on the DNR side that appears to be much different from stuff like you'll find in the Azov batallion or the like which makes the difference here. At least from what I've seen.
Also, most of post-soviet Russian weapons are exported to other countries and freely available on the black market. They can be seen in the Syrian War as well. Does that mean ISIS fighters are actually Russian soldiers as well? It must be, according to Western media logic...
Post-soviet weapons deployed to the Russian forces after the breakup of the Soviet Union are not particularly common. You see lots of AK-47's, AKM's, lots of PKM's, and a relatively sparse sprinkling of AK-74's around the world, relatively more AK-74's in Ukraine because it was the standard Soviet service rifle at the time of the breakup in the early 90's and continued to be used by Ukraine. Sure, those weapons are understandable.
You don't see AK-74M's (introduced in 1991 and not widely issued until the mid-late 90's and AFAIK Ukraine does not have this weapon) or PKP Pecheneg Machine guns (issued only starting in the 2000's) in conflicts around the world as such weapons are significantly less widespread. You see a few in Syria because the Syrian government obtained them from the Russian Federation relatively recently, and some have been looted by their opponents, but not very many at all. Seeing such weapons on the lines in areas of Ukraine would indicate a direct supply source, of some sort, from Russian armories. These weapons are not in Ukrainian stocks to loot or defect with, and their availability from other places is limited in the extreme. Could they be weapons purchased on the black market? Perhaps. But I'd like to think that the Russian military has more discipline and control over its armories now than it did 20 years ago, and unless they're being supplied by Kyrgyzstan or Kazakhstan (either of which would likely require transport through Russia), Russia has to be the source of these weapons.
This was a particular sore thumb with the Crimean action, as you had lots of troops almost exclusively armed with weapons like these, particularly AK-74M's, of which Ukraine had none, and to which Putin subsequently admitted to having deployed Russian forces.
If we were seeing M4 carbines with giggle-switches and Colt's arsenal markings and ACOG's on the Ukrainian side I'd be pointing the same accusations the opposite way. Thus far, we've only seen a very small handful of western weapons (the kinds which are produced both in the US and in Russia and other nations), and lacking arsenal markings which leaves their provenance suspect.
Now, the US can be accused of having done exactly the same thing in other nations, and there's no point in denying that, I'm not saying that Russia is the only nation to have ever engaged in this sort of thing, only that there's a ton of evidence that they currently are doing so in Ukraine currently and it does not appear that there's a lot of evidence of active participation by NATO nations in the Ukrainian conflict aside from what they're openly doing
EDIT: on the note of AK-74M's, that's a rifle I'd love to have, I have an AK-74, but could only ever get a Saiga-conversion clone of an AK-74M, and even those look to be going bye-bye
on the note of AK-74M's, that's a rifle I'd love to have, I have an AK-74, but could only ever get a Saiga-conversion clone of an AK-74M, and even those look to be going bye-bye
I'll have a word with the boss, see if I can get you a couple, Komrade.
The head of the legislature in Russia's Chechnya region says that Russia will provide arms to Mexico if Washington supplies weapons to Ukraine.
Chechen Parliament Speaker Dukvakha Abdurakhmanov said the arms would be aimed at reigniting U.S.-Mexican disputes over “territories annexed by the United States in the American states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and part of Wyoming.”
“We will perceive arms shipments to Ukraine as a signal to respond in kind,” Abdurakhmanov said in a March 24 statement posted on the Chechen parliament’s website.
Abdurakhmanov is a close associate of Ramzan Kadyrov, the Kremlin-backed strongman who rules Chechnya.
If (and that is a BIG IF I don't think is gonna materialize) it were to happen, I suspect the arms would go to cartels and other groups willing to cause trouble and not necessarily the gov't of Mexico.
I suspect it was not meant as a serious comment to be honest.
Considering the Mexican government can't win their war with the cartels and still don't really have control of many of their northern provinces? Yeaaaah no.
Wouldn't a response in kind require shipping arms to a state attempting to leave the U.S. or stay out? So logically the Russians should send arms to Texas.
The head of the legislature in Russia's Chechnya region says that Russia will provide arms to Mexico if Washington supplies weapons to Ukraine.
Chechen Parliament Speaker Dukvakha Abdurakhmanov said the arms would be aimed at reigniting U.S.-Mexican disputes over “territories annexed by the United States in the American states of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and part of Wyoming.”
“We will perceive arms shipments to Ukraine as a signal to respond in kind,” Abdurakhmanov said in a March 24 statement posted on the Chechen parliament’s website.
Abdurakhmanov is a close associate of Ramzan Kadyrov, the Kremlin-backed strongman who rules Chechnya.
Wouldn't that be escalating it? I mean, Ukraine's only fighting separatists, not Russian soldiers under any circumstance ever honestly you guys!
Iron_Captain wrote: You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
Also, most of post-soviet Russian weapons are exported to other countries and freely available on the black market. They can be seen in the Syrian War as well. Does that mean ISIS fighters are actually Russian soldiers as well? It must be, according to Western media logic...
You might want to tell Putin to stop admitting that there were Russian soldiers in Ukraine then
Iron_Captain wrote: You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
Also, most of post-soviet Russian weapons are exported to other countries and freely available on the black market. They can be seen in the Syrian War as well. Does that mean ISIS fighters are actually Russian soldiers as well? It must be, according to Western media logic...
You might want to tell Putin to stop admitting that there were Russian soldiers in Ukraine then
Well that, and to stop allowing certain vehicles/weapon systems that Ukraine never had and have not been exported, and which require certain training and logistics tails to be used within the Ukraine.
There have been examples of Russian Only gear being used, and I'm not talking about uniforms, web gear and rifles.
Russia's ambitious T-50 fighter plane project was meant to develop a rival to two futuristic US jetfighters, the F-22 Raptor and the planned F-35 Lightning-II.
But now, the T-50 appears to be rivaling the F-35 another way: in development troubles. The Kremlin is slamming the brakes on its "fifth generation" fighter program and cutting its initial rollout to a quarter of those originally planned.
The decision seems a setback for Vladimir Putin's sweeping $800 billion rearmament program, a vital component of the wider effort to restore Russia to its Soviet-era status as a major global superpower. However, the sharp slowdown in plans to procure the sophisticated new jet may represent an outbreak of wisdom on the part of Russian military chiefs, who will remember how the USSR was driven into bankruptcy by engaging in an all-out arms race with the US.
Recommended: Sochi, Soviets, and tsars: How much do you know about Russia?
Financial constraints are the key reason cited for cutting the military order from 52 to 12 of the planes over the next few years, according to the Moscow daily Kommersant.
"Given the new economic conditions, the original plans may have to be adjusted," the paper quotes Deputy Defense Minister Yuriy Borisov as saying. The project to build a cutting-edge fighter plane, which is partly financed by India, will not be canceled, but held in abeyance while the Russian Air Force makes the most of its existing "fourth generation" MiG and Sukhoi combat aircraft, he added.
No one knows whether technical problems may also have played a role in the decision to shelve the fighter.
"We may suppose there are problems, but hard information is lacking," says Alexander Golts, an independent military expert. "For instance, the prototypes of this plane have been using an old engine, pending the development of the engine it needs. Has that been developed yet? We have no idea."
The only operational "fifth generation" fighter in the world is the US F-22. Its production was canceled in 2009, after fewer than 200 of the hyper-expensive planes had been built. American military services are now awaiting the arrival of the newer and also hugely overpriced F-35, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, but that program has been dogged with serious delays and technical failures.
The T-50, an advanced stealth plane with many capabilities lacking in previous fighters, has prompted some alarm in the West. The Russians have presented the project as an example of how they are able to leapfrog over the lost years, after Russia's military-industrial complex collapsed along with the Soviet Union, and field 21st century weapons that can rival the best the US has to offer.
Most of the weaponry that's currently in Russia's military inventory are Soviet-era designs that have evolved to incorporate new technology. Only three projects currently in the testing phase have been entirely developed by post-Soviet Russia. They are the T-50, the recently unveiled T-14 Armata tank, and the Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile.
Recent reports suggest that Russian military brass have also decided to slash orders for the new Armata tank, and instead continue using older, Soviet-designed models for a few more years.
There is no word on the fate of other grand projects that Russian military leaders have claimed to have on the drawing boards. These include plans for a super-sized aircraft carrier that would dwarf the US Nimitz class, and an enormous supersonic transport plane that could deliver up to 400 tanks anywhere in the world.
"Despite all these soaring plans, I think we see a bit of reason taking hold in the Russian military establishment," says Mr. Golts. "Even if there were no economic crisis, and no sanctions, this massively expensive rearmament program would not be what Russia needs right now. Scaling it back is a wise move."
Iron_Captain wrote: You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also? Also, most of post-soviet Russian weapons are exported to other countries and freely available on the black market. They can be seen in the Syrian War as well. Does that mean ISIS fighters are actually Russian soldiers as well? It must be, according to Western media logic...
You might want to tell Putin to stop admitting that there were Russian soldiers in Ukraine then
"Chechnya" is going to give arms to Mexico to fight the US?
Mexico has better stuff than Russian already. This guy needs to read a book. His name isn't Zimmerman is it?
on the note of AK-74M's, that's a rifle I'd love to have, I have an AK-74, but could only ever get a Saiga-conversion clone of an AK-74M, and even those look to be going bye-bye
I'll have a word with the boss, see if I can get you a couple, Komrade.
Now if only I could somehow get a class 3 tax stamp for a post -1986 automatic weapon...
You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
Well, when you question the prisoners, and they all say '76th Guards Air Assault Division'...
By the way, last I checked, they were the only unit i have ever heard of who received the Order of Suvorov for having done 'absolutely nothing''. They also lost 80 men 'on training exercises'. How the bodies ended up in the Ukraine is one of those mysteries that has never been explained.
That aside, the gear that is turning up in the Ukraine hasn't all been the old stuff that you can buy on the market. Believe me, I've checked, no one is selling T-90AMs atm. All you can get is the export model. (S/SM) so either these tanks are falling off trucks in Russia, or the Russian government is handing out toys.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, like Hitler and Putin are the only leaders in all of world history to have ever done so... It is one of the most common casus belli.
Not always, but I'll give you this particular point is not uncommon.
Yes, according to both the Ukrainian government statements and the Separatist videos, yes they do. Hind in particular.
Iron_Captain wrote: So every time a opposition figure is murdered and the murder is subsequently investigated by authorities, it makes the leader of the country in which that happened look like Hitler?
If he was the only one to have died mysteriously, no. However, he's the most recent of a fairly long string of Putin's critics to have suffered a severe decline in health.
Iron_Captain wrote: Russia has always been threatening others to get its way, because Russia has more hard than soft power. Stalin, the Tsars and Sweden also threatened and even invaded Denmark. Were they all Hitlers too?
Stalin the argument can, and has on more than one occasion, been made, yes. The Tzars? Depending on which one, that comparison has, on occasion been made as well. Sweden, not so much.
Iron_Captain wrote: Poland is likely the most invaded country in world history.
Actually, Afghanistan holds that title, iirc, but Iraq, the Balkans, and Poland are all contenders.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, if you combine that with building extermination camps to exterminate entire ethnic groups. Those are things that were pretty much unique to Hitler,
No, they're not. The only arguably unique thing about them was that Hitler applied the assembly line to the process.
The US, Russia, Cambodia, North Korea, and China all used starvation and forced relocation. Anyone who resisted was shot.
Rwanda, the Ottoman Empire, Japan, Zanzibar, and Serbia opted for the more direct approach. The Germans tried this one originally and found it inefficient.
You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
Well, when you question the prisoners, and they all say '76th Guards Air Assault Division'...
By the way, last I checked, they were the only unit i have ever heard of who received the Order of Suvorov for having done 'absolutely nothing''. They also lost 80 men 'on training exercises'. How the bodies ended up in the Ukraine is one of those mysteries that has never been explained.
That aside, the gear that is turning up in the Ukraine hasn't all been the old stuff that you can buy on the market. Believe me, I've checked, no one is selling T-90AMs atm. All you can get is the export model. (S/SM) so either these tanks are falling off trucks in Russia, or the Russian government is handing out toys.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, like Hitler and Putin are the only leaders in all of world history to have ever done so... It is one of the most common casus belli.
Not always, but I'll give you this particular point is not uncommon.
Yes, according to both the Ukrainian government statements and the Separatist videos, yes they do. Hind in particular.
Iron_Captain wrote: So every time a opposition figure is murdered and the murder is subsequently investigated by authorities, it makes the leader of the country in which that happened look like Hitler?
If he was the only one to have died mysteriously, no. However, he's the most recent of a fairly long string of Putin's critics to have suffered a severe decline in health.
Iron_Captain wrote: Russia has always been threatening others to get its way, because Russia has more hard than soft power. Stalin, the Tsars and Sweden also threatened and even invaded Denmark. Were they all Hitlers too?
Stalin the argument can, and has on more than one occasion, been made, yes. The Tzars? Depending on which one, that comparison has, on occasion been made as well. Sweden, not so much.
Iron_Captain wrote: Poland is likely the most invaded country in world history.
Actually, Afghanistan holds that title, iirc, but Iraq, the Balkans, and Poland are all contenders.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, if you combine that with building extermination camps to exterminate entire ethnic groups. Those are things that were pretty much unique to Hitler,
No, they're not. The only arguably unique thing about them was that Hitler applied the assembly line to the process.
The US, Russia, Cambodia, North Korea, and China all used starvation and forced relocation. Anyone who resisted was shot.
Rwanda, the Ottoman Empire, Japan, Zanzibar, and Serbia opted for the more direct approach. The Germans tried this one originally and found it inefficient.
You eat food, sleep in a bed, like movies and are suspicous of Russian invasions. Those are some remarkable similarities, Adolf...
Except that there's a universe of difference between putting your boots on the same way and ordering troops into action.
The Germans got the idea for concentration camps from us British (not one of our finest moments). We did it to the Boers, only we used disease to do our dirty work.
You perfectly illustrate the bias of the West. When people with NATO gear appear on the Ukrainian side, they must be Ukrainian volunteers that have bought it on the internet. When people with Russian gear appear on the seperatist side, they must be Russian soldiers. Does it not occur to you that you can buy an entire Russian uniform, complete with every insignia you could possibly want on the internet also?
Well, when you question the prisoners, and they all say '76th Guards Air Assault Division'...
By the way, last I checked, they were the only unit i have ever heard of who received the Order of Suvorov for having done 'absolutely nothing''. They also lost 80 men 'on training exercises'. How the bodies ended up in the Ukraine is one of those mysteries that has never been explained.
It is easy to find 'Russian soldiers' that way. Dress a few guys up in Russian uniforms and have them say on camera they are Russian soldiers sent to invade Ukraine and have been captured. Voilà, Russian invasion. The 76th Air Guards received the Order of Suvorov for the key role they played in the annexation of Crimea. Nothing mysterious about that. And for the claim that they lost 80 men, this is the first time I have heard that and I would like to see a credible source.
BaronIveagh wrote: That aside, the gear that is turning up in the Ukraine hasn't all been the old stuff that you can buy on the market. Believe me, I've checked, no one is selling T-90AMs atm. All you can get is the export model. (S/SM) so either these tanks are falling off trucks in Russia, or the Russian government is handing out toys.
T-90s in Ukraine? Again, source please. For the record, I do believe that Russia is secretly sending weapons to the seperatists. I just don't believe that they would send very modern stuff that could only come from the Russian army when they still have huge stores of old Soviet weapons that can also be found in Ukraine. Nor do I believe the Ukrainian claim that there are entire Russian tank divisions fighting in Ukraine. Why would Putin risk a lot by sending his own troops when he has plenty of locals and volunteers willing to fight for him while he can deny involvement?
No, the black sea fleet remains property of Russia. However, they have seized over 50 Ukrainian vessels since this time last year.
Yes, those Ukrainian vessels have been seized by Russia. However they remain in Sevastopol and do not take part in the conflict. Not sure what your point is here anymore and how it relates to Hitler.
Yes, according to both the Ukrainian government statements and the Separatist videos, yes they do. Hind in particular.
I highly doubt that. It is possible seperatists captured a few helicopters (they took an entire airbase in Crimea) but they lack the infrastructure necessary to support them. Whatever they may have is little compared to what the Ukrainian army has. If the seperatists had any significant air force (or air defenses) than how come the Ukrainian air force can bomb Donetsk and Lugansk at will? They have been bombing since the beginning of the conflict and lost relatively few aircraft. Again, I do not see your point here.
Iron_Captain wrote: So every time a opposition figure is murdered and the murder is subsequently investigated by authorities, it makes the leader of the country in which that happened look like Hitler?
If he was the only one to have died mysteriously, no. However, he's the most recent of a fairly long string of Putin's critics to have suffered a severe decline in health.
But supporters of Putin have been murdered too. In fact, more supporters of Putin have been murdered than critics. I wonder what that means? Whenever a critic of Putin is murdered, arrested or whatever, it is big news in the West and it always made to look like Putin is behind it, regardless of other reasons that person may have been arrested or murdered. People get arrested or murdered regardless of their political views. Secondly, Putin critics have not been dying at any rate close to that of Hitler's critics. It is not like Putin persecutes his critics in any way remotely comparable to Hitler (assuming Putin does in fact persecute his critics, even though there is little reason for him to do so)
Iron_Captain wrote: Russia has always been threatening others to get its way, because Russia has more hard than soft power. Stalin, the Tsars and Sweden also threatened and even invaded Denmark. Were they all Hitlers too?
Stalin the argument can, and has on more than one occasion, been made, yes. The Tzars? Depending on which one, that comparison has, on occasion been made as well. Sweden, not so much.
So Sweden can threaten and invade Denmark at will, but when Stalin or the Tsars do that they are like Hitler? I wonder why is that? Is it because they are Russian?
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, if you combine that with building extermination camps to exterminate entire ethnic groups. Those are things that were pretty much unique to Hitler,
No, they're not. The only arguably unique thing about them was that Hitler applied the assembly line to the process.
The US, Russia, Cambodia, North Korea, and China all used starvation and forced relocation. Anyone who resisted was shot.
Rwanda, the Ottoman Empire, Japan, Zanzibar, and Serbia opted for the more direct approach. The Germans tried this one originally and found it inefficient.
Hitler was the first to do so, and that is why this is the main thing Hitler is associated with. Putin is not doing anything like that and therefore is not like Hitler.
I think the fact that the last time Sweden fought Denmark was in the Napoleonic Wars might matter just a wee bit. We're over the whole invading our neighbours bit, Russia isn't.
Iron_Captain wrote: It is easy to find 'Russian soldiers' that way. Dress a few guys up in Russian uniforms and have them say on camera they are Russian soldiers sent to invade Ukraine and have been captured. Voilà, Russian invasion.
The 76th Air Guards received the Order of Suvorov for the key role they played in the annexation of Crimea. Nothing mysterious about that. And for the claim that they lost 80 men, this is the first time I have heard that and I would like to see a credible source.
While the Sunday Times of London, I can understand your denouncement as being 'western, I'm surprised Ekho St. Petersburg is not credible now.
After all:
Here's a picture of the unit driving 10km from the location on the Russian side of the border a few hours before hand.
And here's the captured vehicle on the other side of the boarder.
Notice the hasty and incomplete effort to paint over the markings. you might also notice that hte unit all use the same camouflage stencils, which are still visable under the quick repaint.
80 kia were reported both in a 'leaked' phone conversation between a hospitalized survivor of the engagement and another member of the 76th, and confirmed by the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers.
Iron_Captain wrote: It is easy to find 'Russian soldiers' that way. Dress a few guys up in Russian uniforms and have them say on camera they are Russian soldiers sent to invade Ukraine and have been captured. Voilà, Russian invasion.
The 76th Air Guards received the Order of Suvorov for the key role they played in the annexation of Crimea. Nothing mysterious about that. And for the claim that they lost 80 men, this is the first time I have heard that and I would like to see a credible source.
While the Sunday Times of London, I can understand your denouncement as being 'western, I'm surprised Ekho St. Petersburg is not credible now.
After all:
Here's a picture of the unit driving 10km from the location on the Russian side of the border a few hours before hand.
And here's the captured vehicle on the other side of the boarder.
Notice the hasty and incomplete effort to paint over the markings. you might also notice that hte unit all use the same camouflage stencils, which are still visable under the quick repaint.
80 kia were reported both in a 'leaked' phone conversation between a hospitalized survivor of the engagement and another member of the 76th, and confirmed by the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers.
Nice try, but those vehicles are not the same. The one in the first picture has ID №100, the one in the second has ID №275. You can see still see the number on the lower right part which I don't know the English word for. Notice that the vehicle in the first picture does not have numbers on that part, and also that those parts have different colour. The first vehicle also has identification numbers on the the two small hatches, which are absent on the second vehicle and have clearly not been painted over like the number on the right.
Of course, you could say it was not the vehicle on the first picture but another one of the vehicles in that column, but than you could just as well say it is a Ukrainian vehicle. Ukraine and Russia still use the same (Soviet) camouflage and markings for many of their BMDs. Also not that the vehicle in the second picture looks a lot more rusty and badly maintained than those in the first picture. Because of this and the fact that its identification numbers have almost entirely faded away, I would say it is an old Soviet vehicle that has been rusting in a depot for a very long time. It does not look like something you would see in Russian frontline units.
Nice try, but those vehicles are not the same. The one in the first picture has ID №100, the one in the second has ID №275. You can see still see the number on the lower right part which I don't know the English word for. Notice that the vehicle in the first picture does not have numbers on that part, and also that those parts have different colour. The first vehicle also has identification numbers on the the two small hatches, which are absent on the second vehicle and have clearly not been painted over like the number on the right.
Of course, you could say it was not the vehicle on the first picture but another one of the vehicles in that column, but than you could just as well say it is a Ukrainian vehicle. Ukraine and Russia still use the same (Soviet) camouflage and markings for many of their BMDs. Also not that the vehicle in the second picture looks a lot more rusty and badly maintained than those in the first picture. Because of this and the fact that its identification numbers have almost entirely faded away, I would say it is an old Soviet vehicle that has been rusting in a depot for a very long time. It does not look like something you would see in Russian frontline units.
I like how you don't address the issue of using the same stencil. You notice that all the vehicles in picture one are not only using the same camouflage pattern, they're using the same stencil of that pattern. Further, they're all bearing the same tactical markings, which are not in use by the Ukrainians, IIRC.
Further, this has been id'd as fleet number 275 from the 1st Airborne Company of the military base 74268. Fifteen of the men named in documentation captured with the vehicle are known members, according to Russian bloggers, of the 76th, and served under the officer who's name's attached to the maintenance logs of the vehicle.
Also, that's not rust. You''ll notice your 'rust' is flowing against gravity in the back. The rust you get from long depot stays tends follow gravity. What that is is spilled fuel or hydraulic fluid and dirt. You'll notice on the left how it scraped off when someone stepped on the right hand side edge to step up into the vehicle.
Our second contestant, 234, this one more heavily damaged, from the same engagement, also listed believed to be from the 76th.
GRANAT-4 UAV, new in Russian service as of 2014, and produced exclusively in Russia by Izhmash Unmanned Aerial Systems LLC, this unit is property of the Southern Military District of the Russian Federation Armed Forces, who launched it, according to the extracted data, from near Rostov on Don. It was shot down while conducting aerial reconnaissance of Ukrainian forces positions in the area of Shchastia in Luhansk region. November 27th, 2014.
Normally, i wouldn't think too much of a T-64BV being involved but this particular unit had some interesting anomalies. Most particularly that it's production number, Ts11ET12109, never was issued to any Ukrainian unit, and it's battery was made in 2010, and a part of the inventory of the 205 Motor Rifle brigade of the Russian Federation, base no.74814.
Nice try, but those vehicles are not the same. The one in the first picture has ID №100, the one in the second has ID №275. You can see still see the number on the lower right part which I don't know the English word for. Notice that the vehicle in the first picture does not have numbers on that part, and also that those parts have different colour. The first vehicle also has identification numbers on the the two small hatches, which are absent on the second vehicle and have clearly not been painted over like the number on the right. Of course, you could say it was not the vehicle on the first picture but another one of the vehicles in that column, but than you could just as well say it is a Ukrainian vehicle. Ukraine and Russia still use the same (Soviet) camouflage and markings for many of their BMDs. Also not that the vehicle in the second picture looks a lot more rusty and badly maintained than those in the first picture. Because of this and the fact that its identification numbers have almost entirely faded away, I would say it is an old Soviet vehicle that has been rusting in a depot for a very long time. It does not look like something you would see in Russian frontline units.
I like how you don't address the issue of using the same stencil. You notice that all the vehicles in picture one are not only using the same camouflage pattern, they're using the same stencil of that pattern. Further, they're all bearing the same tactical markings, which are not in use by the Ukrainians, IIRC.
This camouflage stencil is an old Soviet one. It was used on vehicles in Afghanistan. You can find many vehicles in this camouflage all over the former USSR. The tactical markings are also Soviet. (which are actually the same as modern Russian markings). Soviet markings can still be seen on most older Ukrainian equipment, so it is not like this one looks out of place.
BaronIveagh wrote: Further, this has been id'd as fleet number 275 from the 1st Airborne Company of the military base 74268. Fifteen of the men named in documentation captured with the vehicle are known members, according to Russian bloggers, of the 76th, and served under the officer who's name's attached to the maintenance logs of the vehicle.
ID'd by whom? There are many vehicles with number 275, I'd like to see more details. Also, keep in mind that the documentation was 'captured' by the Ukrainians. Who is to say that it is genuine? It is not as if Ukraine is not waging a huge disinformation and propaganda campaign as part of their war effort, so I tend to be suspicious about anything they say. If everything the Ukrainians said would be true, than half of the entire Russian Army must be in Ukraine.
BaronIveagh wrote: Also, that's not rust. You''ll notice your 'rust' is flowing against gravity in the back. The rust you get from long depot stays tends follow gravity. What that is is spilled fuel or hydraulic fluid and dirt. You'll notice on the left how it scraped off when someone stepped on the right hand side edge to step up into the vehicle.
I don't think we are talking about the same parts here. Nonetheless, you won't vehicles badly maintained like this in a Guards division. Again, compare it to the vehicles you see in the first picture, there is a clear difference.
BaronIveagh wrote: Our second contestant, 234, this one more heavily damaged, from the same engagement, also listed believed to be from the 76th.
Unfortenately, I can not see the rest of your pictures, so I can not comment on them, though I will note that a site called 'Euromaidan PR' is the farthest thing you could possibly be from a trustworthy and impartial source. You might just as well get your information from here: http://dnr-news.com/
Unfortenately, I can not see the rest of your pictures, so I can not comment on them, though I will note that a site called 'Euromaidan PR' is the farthest thing you could possibly be from a trustworthy and impartial source. You might just as well get your information from here: http://dnr-news.com/
The same event was reported in several other sources, I had linked from there because they had nice, high res ones.
Same things, from a different site.
UAV
T-64BV
Could not find another shot of the BMP though, so, sorry, was a pic of a somewhat more smashed up BMP, same camo, same tactical markings, number 234.
As far as IDs go: the Russian military has denied it, but the Ukrainian military, former members of the 76th, and the newspapers around the base at Pskov all stated that they were, in fact, 76th guards vehicles. Reporters who covered the military funerals of the deceased soldiers were savagely beaten. So far, the names in the documents released by the Ukrainians have pretty much jived with a large group of mysteriously dead members of the unit, whose families, according to the Russian press, have not been at liberty to discuss what happened.
Let me ask the question, which is more likely: that Russian troops crossed the boarder, and got ambushed, then withdrew, ;leaving behind some men and equipment? or that the Ukrainians had two exact duplicates of the vehicles that a random Russian unit that happened to be near the boarder on the Russian side, and were able to miraculously predict what members of the unit would die under unusual circumstances in Russia, and that they could pull this whole thing off in the middle of fighting for Lutuhino.
If what you're saying is true, then Ukrainian intelligence needs to start using it's psychic powers to predict enemy movements rather than messing with random Russian units on the far side of the boarder.
BTW: the prisoners taken have all been repatriated to Russia (according to Russian State TV). Seems that they all really were members of the 76th, but they remain officially to have never been to the Ukraine.
Unfortenately, I can not see the rest of your pictures, so I can not comment on them, though I will note that a site called 'Euromaidan PR' is the farthest thing you could possibly be from a trustworthy and impartial source. You might just as well get your information from here: http://dnr-news.com/
The same event was reported in several other sources, I had linked from there because they had nice, high res ones.
Same things, from a different site.
UAV
T-64BV
Could not find another shot of the BMP though, so, sorry, was a pic of a somewhat more smashed up BMP, same camo, same tactical markings, number 234.
As far as IDs go: the Russian military has denied it, but the Ukrainian military, former members of the 76th, and the newspapers around the base at Pskov all stated that they were, in fact, 76th guards vehicles. Reporters who covered the military funerals of the deceased soldiers were savagely beaten. So far, the names in the documents released by the Ukrainians have pretty much jived with a large group of mysteriously dead members of the unit, whose families, according to the Russian press, have not been at liberty to discuss what happened.
Let me ask the question, which is more likely: that Russian troops crossed the boarder, and got ambushed, then withdrew, ;leaving behind some men and equipment? or that the Ukrainians had two exact duplicates of the vehicles that a random Russian unit that happened to be near the boarder on the Russian side, and were able to miraculously predict what members of the unit would die under unusual circumstances in Russia, and that they could pull this whole thing off in the middle of fighting for Lutuhino.
If what you're saying is true, then Ukrainian intelligence needs to start using it's psychic powers to predict enemy movements rather than messing with random Russian units on the far side of the boarder.
BTW: the prisoners taken have all been repatriated to Russia (according to Russian State TV). Seems that they all really were members of the 76th, but they remain officially to have never been to the Ukraine.
Nice, thank you. The UAV is not really any evidence of a Russian invasion, is it? It makes sense the Russian military would send drones to spy on the situation. After all, the US also often sends drones, that is no evidence the US is invading those countries either, right? The tank looks like a regular old Soviet T-64. I can not see its production number or battery however, so it just looks like any other T-64 to me. Russia, however, does not use the T-64. There could still be a few ones in storage somewhere, and it is possible those were send to Ukraine, but a T-64 can not be evidence of involvement of Russian troops. As for the BMP, if it had the same markings as the BMD in the first and second pictures you posted, that would not be strange as it was a common Soviet camouflage pattern and markings.
BaronIveagh wrote: As far as IDs go: the Russian military has denied it, but the Ukrainian military,
BaronIveagh wrote: all stated that they were, in fact, 76th guards vehicles.
According to whom? A impartial source or one that has an interest in this conflict?
BaronIveagh wrote: Reporters who covered the military funerals of the deceased soldiers were savagely beaten.
That sounds suspicious, but who is to say it has not been made up? Is there any evidence? Who were the reporters? Could they have had any political motives for making up such a story? I would like to hear more details before I can make a good conclusion for myself.
BaronIveagh wrote: So far, the names in the documents released by the Ukrainians have pretty much jived with a large group of mysteriously dead members of the unit, whose families, according to the Russian press, have not been at liberty to discuss what happened.
So they found a document listing all dead members of a certain Russian unit? How suspicious. What is such a document doing on the front lines? Such a document should only be in the hands of divisional command, far behind the front lines, in Russia. And if they truly died while fighting in Ukraine, why report them at all? It is not as if the Russian military is known for its record keeping. Soldiers only die when the FSB says they can die. Otherwise they have just been 'transferred' and their deaths only become clear at the end of the conflict. That is how it normally goes. If the Russian military is really fighting in the Ukraine, than why would they leave all these traces behind? And why they operate so amateuristic and completely different from their professional operation in Crimea? It is almost as if there are two different Russian armies. It does not make sense.
BaronIveagh wrote: Let me ask the question, which is more likely: that Russian troops crossed the boarder, and got ambushed, then withdrew, ;leaving behind some men and equipment? or that the Ukrainians had two exact duplicates of the vehicles that a random Russian unit that happened to be near the boarder on the Russian side, and were able to miraculously predict what members of the unit would die under unusual circumstances in Russia, and that they could pull this whole thing off in the middle of fighting for Lutuhino.
You did not consider a third option: That the Ukrainians used one of their own old vehicles and fabricated evidence to show Russian troops in Ukraine as part of the propaganda effort for their own population and to get support in the West. Of course, it is possible that members of the Russian military were delivering supplies to the seperatists and got ambushed, but for now, I think this third option the most likely.
As for the BMP, if it had the same markings as the BMD in the first and second pictures you posted, that would not be strange as it was a common Soviet camouflage pattern and markings.
And had numbering designating it as part of the same unit.
Псковская губерния for September 2nd of last year.
Well, among those hospitalized is the owner of the paper, who is a politician, one Lev Shlosberg, who, according to the hospital, was badly injured. Two reporters were attacked separately, trying to cover the funerals of Leonid Kichatkin and Alexander Osipov. Photos were taken of the Funeral, of the graves, etc. Now the graves have no markers at all.
Soldiers only die when the FSB says they can die. Otherwise they have just been 'transferred' and their deaths only become clear at the end of the conflict. That is how it normally goes.
and that's why Russia has organizations that try to keep track for families, particularly following Afghanistan. and that's how it used to go. Ask the US how hard it is to hide casualties these days.
If the Russian military is really fighting in the Ukraine, than why would they leave all these traces behind? And why they operate so amateuristic and completely different from their professional operation in Crimea?
Because Crimea was easy. it was a walk over. It's easy to not make mistakes when people are not shooting at you. it also didn't last very long. When you send men into a real war, you have messiness. You have dead bodies, prisoners, and wrecked vehicles. When it's right over the boarder, you have people asking questions. You have civilians getting under foot and seeing things they're not supposed to, and taking pictures! You have politicians and reporters asking awkward questions and, worse, doing research and poking holes in official stories.
It's easy to hide the bodies when they're nameless grunts with no ids on in Cambodia, or Colombia, or take your pick of godless hellholes on the other side of the world. It's harder when they're 20 miles from home, and people are posting the wallet contents from the KIAs on facebook. Or, worse, the families announcing the funerals on social media.
As for the BMP, if it had the same markings as the BMD in the first and second pictures you posted, that would not be strange as it was a common Soviet camouflage pattern and markings.
And had numbering designating it as part of the same unit.
That is not possible. Airborne troops do not have any BMPs. BMPs are way too heavy to throw out of aircraft.
Псковская губерния for September 2nd of last year.
Well, among those hospitalized is the owner of the paper, who is a politician, one Lev Shlosberg, who, according to the hospital, was badly injured. Two reporters were attacked separately, trying to cover the funerals of Leonid Kichatkin and Alexander Osipov. Photos were taken of the Funeral, of the graves, etc. Now the graves have no markers at all.
Ah, that is what I wanted to know. Lev Shlosberg is a politician of the liberal anti-Putinist party Yabloko. He would have a clear motive for making up or misrepresenting such a story. I am not saying he did, but it is possible. It would not be the first time liberals did something like that.
The problem is that all information that would indicate Russian soldiers are fighting in Ukraine I have seen so far comes from biased sources that have a clear interest in those stories.
Soldiers only die when the FSB says they can die. Otherwise they have just been 'transferred' and their deaths only become clear at the end of the conflict. That is how it normally goes.
and that's why Russia has organizations that try to keep track for families, particularly following Afghanistan. and that's how it used to go. Ask the US how hard it is to hide casualties these days.
But as seen with the wars in Chechnya and Georgia, those organisations do not work very well. The covering up system has always worked well. Why would they suddenly stop using it? Why would they inform families and bring back bodies to Russia? It would be very easy not to notify anyone and bury the dead in Ukraine.
If the Russian military is really fighting in the Ukraine, than why would they leave all these traces behind? And why they operate so amateuristic and completely different from their professional operation in Crimea?
Because Crimea was easy. it was a walk over. It's easy to not make mistakes when people are not shooting at you. it also didn't last very long. When you send men into a real war, you have messiness. You have dead bodies, prisoners, and wrecked vehicles. When it's right over the boarder, you have people asking questions. You have civilians getting under foot and seeing things they're not supposed to, and taking pictures! You have politicians and reporters asking awkward questions and, worse, doing research and poking holes in official stories.
That is not entirely what I meant. What I meant was: Why are we not seeing guys like this in Ukraine?
You could say they have changed into less suspicious uniforms, but why did they bother doing that if they are not even taking their markings off vehicles?
Also, if the Russian army is involved, than why do the seperatists have it so difficult? The Ukrainian army (if you can even call it that) is in a horrible state. The vast majority of their vehicles has not been maintained since 1991 and is inoperable, a significant part of their standing army has defected, taking equipment with it, they continue to have huge problems with desertion and finding enough conscripts, who are then rushed to the front without training. They even have trouble getting enough food and other essential supplies, as soldiers have had to beg for food from civilians. The only reason why this band of untrained rabble is doing so well is because their opponent is also a band of untrained rabble suffering even more shortages in manpower and heavy equipment, and not one of the strongest armies in the world.
If the Russian military was actually deployed to Ukraine in the numbers that are suggested, the situation would be very different, and not with the Ukrainian Army a few kilometers from Donetsk.
Iron_Captain wrote: He would have a clear motive for making up or misrepresenting such a story. I am not saying he did, but it is possible. It would not be the first time liberals did something like that.
The problem is that all information that would indicate Russian soldiers are fighting in Ukraine I have seen so far comes from biased sources that have a clear interest in those stories.
you haven;t noticed that at this point there's no impartial news? Every media source in Russia right now has a vested interest in either promoting or suppressing these stories?
But as seen with the wars in Chechnya and Georgia, those organisations do not work very well. The covering up system has always worked well. Why would they suddenly stop using it? Why would they inform families and bring back bodies to Russia? It would be very easy not to notify anyone and bury the dead in Ukraine.
I think the answer is quite obvious: Everyone got wise to how it worked because of the wars in Georgia and Chechnya. There was not a lot of back and forth action in South Ossetia. There is in the Ukraine. The longer something goes on, the harder it is to keep it under wraps.
You could say they have changed into less suspicious uniforms, but why did they bother doing that if they are not even taking their markings off vehicles?
I got the impression that the actions around 20 August of last year were somewhat impromptu. Remember at the same time as the 76th got hammered, another group of paratroopers 'lost their way' and crossed into the Ukraine as well.
Also, if the Russian army is involved, than why do the seperatists have it so difficult? The Ukrainian army (if you can even call it that) is in a horrible state. The vast majority of their vehicles has not been maintained since 1991 and is inoperable, a significant part of their standing army has defected, taking equipment with it, they continue to have huge problems with desertion and finding enough conscripts, who are then rushed to the front without training.
I've been watching the posted desertion numbers. It's hard to tell the reality there. The Ukrainians admit they have a problem with it, but the Russians over inflate it staggeringly (to the degree it reminds me of the US counting chickens as VC KIA). I also have to ask what you consider significant, btw. If you're referring to the RT thing about Ukrainian military crossing over into Russia to defect in their hundreds, btw, you'd be wrong, that story turned out to be untrue.
37% of those conscripted have failed to turn up. Again, that's not too bad for a Civil War. The reason neitehr side has won yet is the same old issue you run into in every civil war: the locals turn out with kitchen knives at night. (usually figuratively, but sometimes literally)
Iron_Captain wrote: If the Russian military was actually deployed to Ukraine in the numbers that are suggested, the situation would be very different, and not with the Ukrainian Army a few kilometers from Donetsk.
Given the scope of the fighting, 15k men isn't that many.
Iron_Captain wrote: If the Russian military was actually deployed to Ukraine in the numbers that are suggested, the situation would be very different, and not with the Ukrainian Army a few kilometers from Donetsk.
Given the scope of the fighting, 15k men isn't that many.
Also, every time it seems that the Ukrainian forces are about to make meaningful gains in ground the separatists suddenly manage to launch a highly successful counter attack and regain that ground.
Also, you're assuming that Putin wants the separatists to "win". It is entirely possible that his plan is just to drag the fighting out, keeping the Ukrainians close to securing Donetsk but aplying the necessary force to prevent them from achieving that goal. This keeps Ukraine stuck in a messy civil war which will prevent them from being able to join the EU or NATO or whatever it is that Putin is scared of.
Iron_Captain wrote: If the Russian military was actually deployed to Ukraine in the numbers that are suggested, the situation would be very different, and not with the Ukrainian Army a few kilometers from Donetsk.
Given the scope of the fighting, 15k men isn't that many.
Also, every time it seems that the Ukrainian forces are about to make meaningful gains in ground the separatists suddenly manage to launch a highly successful counter attack and regain that ground.
Also, you're assuming that Putin wants the separatists to "win". It is entirely possible that his plan is just to drag the fighting out, keeping the Ukrainians close to securing Donetsk but aplying the necessary force to prevent them from achieving that goal. This keeps Ukraine stuck in a messy civil war which will prevent them from being able to join the EU or NATO or whatever it is that Putin is scared of.
Oh really? Than maybe you can explain how come the seperatists have lost over half their territory since the war started?
Spoiler:
BaronIveagh wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote: He would have a clear motive for making up or misrepresenting such a story. I am not saying he did, but it is possible. It would not be the first time liberals did something like that.
The problem is that all information that would indicate Russian soldiers are fighting in Ukraine I have seen so far comes from biased sources that have a clear interest in those stories.
you haven;t noticed that at this point there's no impartial news? Every media source in Russia right now has a vested interest in either promoting or suppressing these stories?
Pretty much, yes. And that makes determining the truth almost impossible and highly subjective to political opinion.
But as seen with the wars in Chechnya and Georgia, those organisations do not work very well. The covering up system has always worked well. Why would they suddenly stop using it? Why would they inform families and bring back bodies to Russia? It would be very easy not to notify anyone and bury the dead in Ukraine.
I think the answer is quite obvious: Everyone got wise to how it worked because of the wars in Georgia and Chechnya. There was not a lot of back and forth action in South Ossetia. There is in the Ukraine. The longer something goes on, the harder it is to keep it under wraps.
No they did not. The cover up system they used in Chechnya worked well. No one still knows the truth about the gak that happened in Chechnya, what is true and what is not and how many people died there. Journalists who nose around Chechnya too much are often killed, even now the conflict has ended. There is no reason why they would suddenly start sending bodies home instead of burying them locally. Georgia was a pushover, it was over very fast and not many people died, but the Georgian army was very well trained (by the US) and equipped compared to the Ukrainian army. If the Russian army is indeed deployed in numbers up to 15.000 (which is more than the 10.000 that were deployed in Ossetia during the Georgian War) than why do they have so much trouble with the Ukrainian Army?
You could say they have changed into less suspicious uniforms, but why did they bother doing that if they are not even taking their markings off vehicles?
I got the impression that the actions around 20 August of last year were somewhat impromptu. Remember at the same time as the 76th got hammered, another group of paratroopers 'lost their way' and crossed into the Ukraine as well.
Yes, but they just barged in wearing full uniforms and did not resist at all when they met Ukrainian troops. The Russian government immediately admitted they were actual Russian soldiers. It is quite likely they indeed lost their way, which is not uncommon, it happens the other way around as well. There have been quite a lot of accidental and also deliberate border crossings by Ukrainian troops.
Also, if the Russian army is involved, than why do the seperatists have it so difficult? The Ukrainian army (if you can even call it that) is in a horrible state. The vast majority of their vehicles has not been maintained since 1991 and is inoperable, a significant part of their standing army has defected, taking equipment with it, they continue to have huge problems with desertion and finding enough conscripts, who are then rushed to the front without training.
I've been watching the posted desertion numbers. It's hard to tell the reality there. The Ukrainians admit they have a problem with it, but the Russians over inflate it staggeringly (to the degree it reminds me of the US counting chickens as VC KIA). I also have to ask what you consider significant, btw. If you're referring to the RT thing about Ukrainian military crossing over into Russia to defect in their hundreds, btw, you'd be wrong, that story turned out to be untrue.
37% of those conscripted have failed to turn up. Again, that's not too bad for a Civil War. The reason neitehr side has won yet is the same old issue you run into in every civil war: the locals turn out with kitchen knives at night. (usually figuratively, but sometimes literally)
Iron_Captain wrote: If the Russian military was actually deployed to Ukraine in the numbers that are suggested, the situation would be very different, and not with the Ukrainian Army a few kilometers from Donetsk.
Given the scope of the fighting, 15k men isn't that many.
It is when you consider the fact that the entire seperatist strenght is estimated at 10.000 to 20.000. The scope of the fighting is not that large, given that it is very low intensity most of the time and centered around a few villages/towns.
In the meantime some people in the West estimate that there are up to 42.000 Russian troops fighting in Ukraine, which would be a very significant part of Russia's standing army. I hope I don't have to explain to you how utterly ridiculous such a claim is.
Oh really? Than maybe you can explain how come the seperatists have lost over half their territory since the war started?
They started out holding more on paper than in reality? At the start of a civil war, typically the claim of having a territory means that three guys in a jeep rode up, unfurled a flag, and then drove off. Then you find out you're over extended, lack local support, so on and so forth, and the territory contracts to what you can actually hold.
No they did not. The cover up system they used in Chechnya worked well. No one still knows the truth about the gak that happened in Chechnya, what is true and what is not and how many people died there. Journalists who nose around Chechnya too much are often killed, even now the conflict has ended. There is no reason why they would suddenly start sending bodies home instead of burying them locally. Georgia was a pushover, it was over very fast and not many people died, but the Georgian army was very well trained (by the US) and equipped compared to the Ukrainian army. If the Russian army is indeed deployed in numbers up to 15.000 (which is more than the 10.000 that were deployed in Ossetia during the Georgian War) than why do they have so much trouble with the Ukrainian Army?
More people, more cameras, more civilian traffic, more reporters on the scene the Russians can't control. Plus too many of their fellow Russians standing around seeing things to effectively silence everyone.
Chechnya has only a small boarder with anyone other than Russia, and that's high in the mountains. It's easy to control who goes in, and comes out. Their telcom industry was practically medieval at the time (And probably still is) and was also easily cut off. Generally they're hated by the Russians, and thus anything they say is more suspect.
Georgia was more modern, but was over very quickly and left the Russians in charge of the area the fighting took place in.
Ukraine is both fairly modern, large, and has big, friendly boarders for reporters and such to come and go. Their army HAS been able to push back and retake ground, and unlike the other two, other countries around them give a damn about what happens. Worse, the UN monitors are poking their noses in every grave they see, due to Russia's own allegations of war crimes against the Ukraine. and there is tremendous international scrutiny, far more so than Georgia or Chechnya.
Can you imagine the stink if they open graves and find someone's overlooked dog tags? Or the forensic anthropologists test them and find they all came from the same military base in Russia (yes, you can do that now)? They can put a name to a corpse after 100 years in the ground these days, with a few months and good labs.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, but they just barged in wearing full uniforms and did not resist at all when they met Ukrainian troops. The Russian government immediately admitted they were actual Russian soldiers. It is quite likely they indeed lost their way, which is not uncommon, it happens the other way around as well. There have been quite a lot of accidental and also deliberate border crossings by Ukrainian troops.
Actually they initially denied it, then admitted it. And, frankly, i think the fact that they immediately surrendered rather than attempt to engage is probably the difference between the two official responses.
I don't think I understand the saying in the second part of your post, but when 37% of your army fails to show up (on top of the desertions of those who do show up and the defections of many who joined the Army before the conflict) you have a big problem.
Desertions are, officially, at least, currently fairly low. I attribute it to the guys who were going to desert already have, and that men attempting to can now be shot. Which, before you go on a rant about how barbaric that is, actually it's fairly common in armies that if you try to desert in the face of the enemy, you can be shot.
And, no, 37% is fairly good. Compare it to other civil wars and their rates of people dodging the draft, those are good solid numbers that show a lot of people turning out to fight. Lincoln would have strangled someone for numbers that good in the US Civil War. I think I pointed out earlier they drafted something like 400k and had 20k show up in one draft.
It is when you consider the fact that the entire separatist strength is estimated at 10.000 to 20.000.
Unfortunately that depends on who's doing the estimating. I've head numbers as low as 2 thousand, and has high as one hundred thousand. Most seem to bobble around 30-50k with an additional 3 to 50 thousand Russian troops. The numbers for the Ukrainian military also seem to fluctuate wildly.
My theory is that the Ukrainian military has higher numbers, while the Separatists have better gear and some Russian support.
I laughed my ass off when TASS ran a story that NATO had 50k troops on the Ukrainian boarder with Russia. They pulled it within two hours. Seems that someone pointed out that they mistranslated what was actually said by NATO.
Oh really? Than maybe you can explain how come the seperatists have lost over half their territory since the war started?
They started out holding more on paper than in reality? At the start of a civil war, typically the claim of having a territory means that three guys in a jeep rode up, unfurled a flag, and then drove off. Then you find out you're over extended, lack local support, so on and so forth, and the territory contracts to what you can actually hold.
Actually, there was very fierce fighting for Slavyansk and Kramatorsk before the Seperatists were driven back.
No they did not. The cover up system they used in Chechnya worked well. No one still knows the truth about the gak that happened in Chechnya, what is true and what is not and how many people died there. Journalists who nose around Chechnya too much are often killed, even now the conflict has ended. There is no reason why they would suddenly start sending bodies home instead of burying them locally. Georgia was a pushover, it was over very fast and not many people died, but the Georgian army was very well trained (by the US) and equipped compared to the Ukrainian army. If the Russian army is indeed deployed in numbers up to 15.000 (which is more than the 10.000 that were deployed in Ossetia during the Georgian War) than why do they have so much trouble with the Ukrainian Army?
More people, more cameras, more civilian traffic, more reporters on the scene the Russians can't control. Plus too many of their fellow Russians standing around seeing things to effectively silence everyone.
Chechnya has only a small boarder with anyone other than Russia, and that's high in the mountains. It's easy to control who goes in, and comes out. Their telcom industry was practically medieval at the time (And probably still is) and was also easily cut off. Generally they're hated by the Russians, and thus anything they say is more suspect.
Georgia was more modern, but was over very quickly and left the Russians in charge of the area the fighting took place in.
Ukraine is both fairly modern, large, and has big, friendly boarders for reporters and such to come and go. Their army HAS been able to push back and retake ground, and unlike the other two, other countries around them give a damn about what happens. Worse, the UN monitors are poking their noses in every grave they see, due to Russia's own allegations of war crimes against the Ukraine. and there is tremendous international scrutiny, far more so than Georgia or Chechnya.
Can you imagine the stink if they open graves and find someone's overlooked dog tags? Or the forensic anthropologists test them and find they all came from the same military base in Russia (yes, you can do that now)? They can put a name to a corpse after 100 years in the ground these days, with a few months and good labs.
Well, Chechnya actually is inside Russia in case you had not noticed. There were also plenty of ethnic Russians living there and any reporter could get in by bribing a guard. Corruption was really out of control in those days. Chechnya has also advanced a lot since the war, they are doing relatively well (at least better than Ukraine).
You do have a point in that technology was not as advanced and widespread yet at that point, but I do not see that as enough reason for the Russian military to just drop all their attempts at covering up and instead just put their fingers in their ears and deny everything. The other explanation is of course that there is nothing to cover up, or at least not as much as Ukrainian and Western propaganda wants to make it look like.
Iron_Captain wrote: Yes, but they just barged in wearing full uniforms and did not resist at all when they met Ukrainian troops. The Russian government immediately admitted they were actual Russian soldiers. It is quite likely they indeed lost their way, which is not uncommon, it happens the other way around as well. There have been quite a lot of accidental and also deliberate border crossings by Ukrainian troops.
Actually they initially denied it, then admitted it. And, frankly, i think the fact that they immediately surrendered rather than attempt to engage is probably the difference between the two official responses.
Please explain more, I don't think I understand what you want to say here. It also does not really explain that they wore full uniforms and that the Russian military admitted it, even if they denied at first. If they really had been there to fight alongside the seperatists, than the Russian military would have kept denying it, don't you think? They could just have said that all evidence was fabricated or something like that.
Why could not the reason be that those soldiers actually did cross the border accidentally (it is unmarked) and that the Russian military just wanted to bring them back home?
I don't think I understand the saying in the second part of your post, but when 37% of your army fails to show up (on top of the desertions of those who do show up and the defections of many who joined the Army before the conflict) you have a big problem.
Desertions are, officially, at least, currently fairly low. I attribute it to the guys who were going to desert already have, and that men attempting to can now be shot. Which, before you go on a rant about how barbaric that is, actually it's fairly common in armies that if you try to desert in the face of the enemy, you can be shot.
And, no, 37% is fairly good. Compare it to other civil wars and their rates of people dodging the draft, those are good solid numbers that show a lot of people turning out to fight. Lincoln would have strangled someone for numbers that good in the US Civil War. I think I pointed out earlier they drafted something like 400k and had 20k show up in one draft.
Shooting deserters is a good measure. I don't know whether 37% is good or not (or even where that number comes from), but I do know that the Ukrainians themselves have admitted having large problems with finding enough soldiers. I think we can trust them on that, for why would they otherwise say so?
It is when you consider the fact that the entire separatist strength is estimated at 10.000 to 20.000.
Unfortunately that depends on who's doing the estimating. I've head numbers as low as 2 thousand, and has high as one hundred thousand. Most seem to bobble around 30-50k with an additional 3 to 50 thousand Russian troops. The numbers for the Ukrainian military also seem to fluctuate wildly.
My theory is that the Ukrainian military has higher numbers, while the Separatists have better gear and some Russian support.
I laughed my ass off when TASS ran a story that NATO had 50k troops on the Ukrainian boarder with Russia. They pulled it within two hours. Seems that someone pointed out that they mistranslated what was actually said by NATO.
Don't you think that with tens of thousands of Russian troops, this conflict would look quite a bit different?
I think that when you look at the scale and intensity of the fighting so far, you can conclude that there are no more than a few ten thousand troops on both sides.
Also, the seperatists have better gear? Than why are they pulling T-34s off monuments all over Donbass?
The Seperatists also have been using all kinds of old weaponry from WW1 and 2.
They raided a mine under Slavyansk which served as one of the largest small arms depots of the Soviet Union, but most of the weapons stored there where from WW2. They have no shortage of weapons, but if they had better quality ones, than why are they using such old relics?
In any case they do not seem to have as much heavy equipment, Ukraine has a huge amount of tanks, and the seperatists especially lack artillery, as evidenced by the difference in the number of shellings of seperatist towns and government towns. They also have no operational airplanes. Overall, I would say they do not have the better gear.
Iron_Captain wrote: Actually, there was very fierce fighting for Slavyansk and Kramatorsk before the Seperatists were driven back.
Two strong points don't mean they were not over extended. Battery Wagner was a hell of a strong point. They still abandoned it because they simply couldn't support it with the rest of the line folding.
You do have a point in that technology was not as advanced and widespread yet at that point, but I do not see that as enough reason for the Russian military to just drop all their attempts at covering up and instead just put their fingers in their ears and deny everything. The other explanation is of course that there is nothing to cover up, or at least not as much as Ukrainian and Western propaganda wants to make it look like.
Because in this case, leaving the bodies there means someone finds them. It's less likely that they get found right away if you were to fly them back.
Also, the seperatists have better gear? Than why are they pulling T-34s off monuments all over Donbass?
Well, in Luhansk it was a lie, the tank was removed by the Kaska veterans association in preparation for getting it running again for May. (It had previously been fully restored in 2013) (Vehicle Number 237)
I looked around the list of surviving T-34s and the tank in the video does not match any Monument tank I could find in the Ukraine. There are a lot of them, don't get me wrong, but this is not, as far as I am able to find, one of them (and I have pictures of at least most of them, even the ones that are just turrets on a plinth). A T-34 with turret number 301 is, however, in the collection of the Kubinka tank museum, though I could not find a picture to compare them. So, this might just be a video of them moving something around the collection at Kubinka and someone claiming it's separatists stealing a t-34, since that story is already out there.
Further, Volodarsky salt mine contained a lot more than WW2 gear. Also, don't sell the PTRS short. It might not stop a MBT or IFV, but it will make a mess of anything lighter.
As far as the desertions go, 37% was the official number they were talking about not showing up after being drafted. Getting enough troops where you need them is always a problem. In this case though, they probably lowballed thier initial drafts, so when a fair percentage didn't show up, it caught them by surprise.
As to why one paratroop group was admitted and one was denied: The troops who surrendered immediately did the correct thing when troops accidentally cross into another country and are confronted (honest mistake). The other actively engaged the Ukrainian military (act of war). So, to keep up the pretense of not being involved, one group they could say 'whoops, our bad, we made a goof'. The other it's a lot harder to blow off, particularly when you're already suspected of covert involvement in the conflict. So they deny. it may have been an honest mistake,but because they directly engaged, Moscow would never be able to admit that it happened without losing a lot of face.
You could have the prime minister (or is it president, whatever one Putin's swapped out of this time) come out and admit to it and the Russian government's line would still be "yeah, not us". =P
The point that the rest of the world is turning a blind eye to this and not pressing to back up already known knowledge is a good one however. Woo appeasement.
I thought we had stopped but apparently we're back to actually, seriously debating whether or not Russia has troops in Ukraine here. Can't even be bothered.
the Ukrainians aren't letting lots of necessary items like food into the separatist areas from their side and appear to be letting trucks sit idle full of supplies and not allowed to cross, international food aid from things like UNICEF is apparently being distributed within the separatist areas under the guise of having been provided by the DNR fighters or Russia instead, people in the separatist areas are mad their pensions aren't being paid by the government they want to break away from, supermarket shelves are increasingly empty except for Vodka, and food is all around apparently getting scarcer and more expensive in the separatist areas.
That part about the pensions isn't unique to Ukraine. For some reason separatists never consider that their pensions won't continue if the separate. I wonder which currency they are using in the rebel areas? Have they switched to Russian Rubles? Has Crimea?
KamikazeCanuck wrote: That part about the pensions isn't unique to Ukraine. For some reason separatists never consider that their pensions won't continue if the separate. I wonder which currency they are using in the rebel areas? Have they switched to Russian Rubles? Has Crimea?
Crimea absolutley has. Russian currency, Russian timezone, etc.
In the Donbass, I haven't seen anything definitive on that, most of the time money comes up its people complaining their pensions aren't being payed.
Vaktathi wrote: Crimea absolutley has. Russian currency, Russian timezone, etc.
So, based on what they're complaining about in Moscow these fays, they're paying in US dollars then, as Russian currency is worth less than the paper it's printed on.
It's been climbing again, don't get me wrong, but it's so unstable another round of sanctions could spell the end for the Russian financial system.
Ukraine has signed a new short-term agreement to buy gas from Russia at a lower price, despite the ongoing conflict in the east of the country.
Ukraine will pay $248 per thousand cubic metres over the next three months down from the $329 it had been paying in the first quarter of this year.
Talks will continue to find a permanent solution to the long-running pricing dispute.
Ukraine said it would still be required to pre-pay Russia for its gas supplies.
Kiev accuses Moscow of supporting separatists rebels in eastern Ukraine in a conflict that began in November 2013 and has left the country in a precarious economic situation.
However Ukraine's energy minister, Volodymyr Demchyshyn said Ukraine's state gas company, Naftogaz, had been able to reach a short term agreement with Russian gas giant, Gazprom.
Previously Russia has threatened to cut off Ukraine's energy supplies over unmet bills.
In the past disputes over the supply of Russian gas to Ukraine have led to knock-on supply problems in other parts of Europe which rely on supplies of gas from Gazprom.
I think there's an old adage that goes something like "countries that trade with each other don't shoot at each other". Those wacky Kievian Rus showed us you can have it all.
Iron_Captain wrote: Actually, there was very fierce fighting for Slavyansk and Kramatorsk before the Seperatists were driven back.
Two strong points don't mean they were not over extended. Battery Wagner was a hell of a strong point. They still abandoned it because they simply couldn't support it with the rest of the line folding.
If they had tens of thousands of Russian soldiers with them as you claim, than how were they overextended?
Also, the seperatists have better gear? Than why are they pulling T-34s off monuments all over Donbass?
Well, in Luhansk it was a lie, the tank was removed by the Kaska veterans association in preparation for getting it running again for May. (It had previously been fully restored in 2013) (Vehicle Number 237)
I looked around the list of surviving T-34s and the tank in the video does not match any Monument tank I could find in the Ukraine. There are a lot of them, don't get me wrong, but this is not, as far as I am able to find, one of them (and I have pictures of at least most of them, even the ones that are just turrets on a plinth). A T-34 with turret number 301 is, however, in the collection of the Kubinka tank museum, though I could not find a picture to compare them. So, this might just be a video of them moving something around the collection at Kubinka and someone claiming it's separatists stealing a t-34, since that story is already out there.
Wow, that is awesome. You seem to actually know a lot about the region, unlike 99% of people in this thread.
But what about this tank? It used to be a monument in Antratsyt, but it definetely seems to be in use by the Seperatists now:
Also, since you seem so knowledgeable about T-34 monuments, do you maybe recognise this one?
Its turret number is 137, with a red star next to it.
Tyran wrote:We all agree there are Russian soldiers in Ukraine, now the question is how many?
Not many. There are could be some military advisors, commanders and operators of specialised equipment, but not entire divisions.
KamikazeCanuck wrote:That part about the pensions isn't unique to Ukraine. For some reason separatists never consider that their pensions won't continue if the separate. I wonder which currency they are using in the rebel areas? Have they switched to Russian Rubles? Has Crimea?
Ukraine still considers Donetsk and Lugansk so to be parts of Ukraine, so I think that it would be reasonable for the people there to expect the Ukrainian government to continue paying their pensions. Not that it is unique to Eastern Ukraine though. The Ukrainian government is as good as broke, they have trouble paying pensions in other parts of the country too. In rebel areas they stil use Ukrainian money, in Crimea they are switching to Russian Rubles. At the moment both Ukrainian and Russian money is valid in Crimea.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Looks like the conflict has not halted trade
Ukraine has signed a new short-term agreement to buy gas from Russia at a lower price, despite the ongoing conflict in the east of the country.
Ukraine will pay $248 per thousand cubic metres over the next three months down from the $329 it had been paying in the first quarter of this year.
Talks will continue to find a permanent solution to the long-running pricing dispute.
Ukraine said it would still be required to pre-pay Russia for its gas supplies.
Kiev accuses Moscow of supporting separatists rebels in eastern Ukraine in a conflict that began in November 2013 and has left the country in a precarious economic situation.
However Ukraine's energy minister, Volodymyr Demchyshyn said Ukraine's state gas company, Naftogaz, had been able to reach a short term agreement with Russian gas giant, Gazprom.
Previously Russia has threatened to cut off Ukraine's energy supplies over unmet bills.
In the past disputes over the supply of Russian gas to Ukraine have led to knock-on supply problems in other parts of Europe which rely on supplies of gas from Gazprom.
Ukraine simply has not much choice. If they do not get enough gas from Russia, they will not have enough supplies to last through winter. Besides gas, Ukraine also relies on Russia for many other things, and Russia is by far Ukraine's largest trading partner. They may have a conflict with Russia, but they are not going to cut ties anytime soon.
Iron_Captain wrote: Ukraine still considers Donetsk and Lugansk so to be parts of Ukraine, so I think that it would be reasonable for the people there to expect the Ukrainian government to continue paying their pensions. Not that it is unique to Eastern Ukraine though. The Ukrainian government is as good as broke, they have trouble paying pensions in other parts of the country too.
I don't think anyone will deny that the Ukrainian government is rather inept, and has been for, well, a very long time and there are longstanding social, institutional, and political reasons for that state of affairs.
That said, the concept of suspending payments to persons within conflict zones isn't an unreasonable measure. Finance, banking, & telecommunications systems are not secure. Even setting aside the possibility of the recipients using such funds to fight against the Ukrainian state, there's a very real possibility that funds never reach their intended recipients, either through malfunction of institutions or active diversion/siphoning/skimming/seizure of funds by those now in control.
KamikazeCanuck wrote: If the people living there don't consider themselves Ukrainian anymore I don't see why they would expect to get benefits from Ukraine anymore.
I mean, that's a fair point, if they don't want to be part of Ukraine and are willing to fight to get away, then it's hard to see why Ukraine should keep paying them. Though to be fair, they put in their time all the same and many/most of these people are just trying to get by and having little or nothing to do directly with the fighting. Personally, either way, my bigger concern would be the financial institutions not being secured.
Wow, I was absent just for one week and here are so many text... Does anybody wait for my answers about my last post 2 pages ago? Or duel Iron_Captain vs BaronIveagh is more interesting? About T-34 mentioned by Iron_Captain: I found that it is stolen monument tank from Druzhkivka, it was not repaired and it was returned back last July https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9BAmfGYsQ8 I think it was stolen just for dismantling and sale as scrap metal, not for fighting.
But you can find a lot of truly restored and functioning WW2 tanks like IS. Here is video about restored IS-3 by separatists and then captured by ukrainian army: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0RgrQOZ84Q
About contracts between Ukraine and Russia: mutual recriminations do not prevent trading between them. Ukraine get gas and coal from Russia (Donbass is coal-mining region with high-quality black coal, so it is huge shortage of coal in Ukraine now and Kiev buy it in Russian. Somebody say that Ukraine buys coal from Russia that was mined in Donbass) etc. Ukrainian oligarchs factory still working on in Russia (for example candy factory of Poroschenko in Russian city of Lipetsk).
If they had tens of thousands of Russian soldiers with them as you claim, than how were they overextended?
Because 15k men isn't a whole lot, once you break it down into logistics, etc. You also have the issue that your lines of supply may be too long, or cut by enemy action that would also leave you over extended.
It's also why I don't buy the 10k number for the separatists. You'd be left with too small a force to hold a city, even against a demoralized enemy. On paper the Ukrainian military is pretty huge. In reality they can field about 50k troops on the front. Figure about half that are actually deployed to the area, and you'd still have more than enough to simply crush the Separatists.
Also, since you seem so knowledgeable about T-34 monuments, do you maybe recognize this one?
Its turret number is 137, with a red star next to it.
85th Independent Tank Regiment monument in Sevastopol. and I like it's new paint job.
BTW: I sorted out who exactly is taking the tanks. It's not the Donbass separatist military. Sort of. Local militias are the ones stealing these, (on both sides of the fence), after having watched a youtube video where two jokers get the engines to start on two monument tanks. There was an interview with the ones in Antratsyt, it was.... well, let's just say that the 'officer' being interviewed seemed to have a (not entirely surprising) lack of any idea what is required to get some monument tanks fully working, let alone fighting. I have to attribute that one being up and running to dumb luck that it was still in good shape and have to wonder where they're going to get the ammunition.
They had the same problem in Armenia back in the 90's: local volunteers would steal the monument tanks, and then you'd find them places where they discovered that the tank was beyond salvage, filled with concrete, etc etc. They'll have that problem with the one in your earlier video. Traced it down, it's the monument in Druzhkovka (my picture is older for it and had no number). They're going to have a devil of a time getting the concrete out of the gun.
On the up side, if the militias are opening up sealed tanks on monuments, if they're not careful they'll save the Ukrainian government some bullets. If they got water in them, the oxygen levels inside the tank will be depleted, meaning that there's a good chance that someone will suffocate if they have not let it air out properly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Asadjud wrote: Wow, I was absent just for one week and here are so many text... Does anybody wait for my answers about my last post 2 pages ago? Or duel Iron_Captain vs BaronIveagh is more interesting? About T-34 mentioned by Iron_Captain: I found that it is stolen monument tank from Druzhkivka, it was not repaired and it was returned back last July https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9BAmfGYsQ8 I think it was stolen just for dismantling and sale as scrap metal, not for fighting.
.
Nuts, Ninja'd.
Please let the separatists know that they'll get more money selling their stolen monument tanks on the open market then they will for the scrap value. WW2 tanks in even decent shape can fetch hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars. German WW2 tanks in particular can fetch tens of millions, due to rarity.
Ok, on whataboutism:
I thought i had posted about this, but apparently did not. The problem with whataboutism is that it ignores the fact that just because someone else did it, or did something worse, does not actually excuse the act in question. It's frequently done to try and justify the unjustifiable, just by saying 'well, what about what YOU did?' and was actually used as an attempted defense at Nuremberg by certain Nazi's who claimed their inhuman medical experiments were OK, because both Russia and the US had also done inhuman medical experiments.
Ultimately, it's an attempt to deflect and shift blame, via accusing the other person of hypocrisy, rather than actually address the issue.
If they're salvaging those monument tanks as legitimate fighting vehicles, wouldn't the militias go through at least some modernizing process? ...Ok probably not. Still, strip out the gun for something more practical (that you can actually find the ammunition for) and weld on a load of armour. Then have the local engineers give you hell over the fact you've spent the time doing up an old tank when you could have been out there repairing one of the newer one's that had been taken out of action.
Ooh, but good point BaronIveagh about those tanks actual market value. I wouldn't know how they'd get them out of the country however (it'd have to be up through Russia, customs in other countries would notice the theft. That is if the local constabulary weren't just corrupt).
If they had tens of thousands of Russian soldiers with them as you claim, than how were they overextended?
Because 15k men isn't a whole lot, once you break it down into logistics, etc. You also have the issue that your lines of supply may be too long, or cut by enemy action that would also leave you over extended.
It's also why I don't buy the 10k number for the separatists. You'd be left with too small a force to hold a city, even against a demoralized enemy. On paper the Ukrainian military is pretty huge. In reality they can field about 50k troops on the front. Figure about half that are actually deployed to the area, and you'd still have more than enough to simply crush the Separatists.
I think 15k men is a whole lot. In Syria and Iraq, ISIS captured huge areas with just a few hundred to thousand of fighters, and according to CIA estimates, they can muster at most between 20.000 and 31.500 fighters (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/11/world/meast/isis-syria-iraq/) and that is up from 10.000 when they captured all those areas. You do not need a huge force to fight against a demoralised enemy, as long as your own fighters are highly motivated.
Also, since you seem so knowledgeable about T-34 monuments, do you maybe recognize this one?
Its turret number is 137, with a red star next to it.
85th Independent Tank Regiment monument in Sevastopol. and I like it's new paint job.
I always used to climb on top of that tank when I was a kid. It is a great place to sit. I often wondered if it was still capable of driving and shooting (probably not though, it was damaged in the war).
BaronIveagh wrote: BTW: I sorted out who exactly is taking the tanks. It's not the Donbass separatist military. Sort of. Local militias are the ones stealing these, (on both sides of the fence), after having watched a youtube video where two jokers get the engines to start on two monument tanks. There was an interview with the ones in Antratsyt, it was.... well, let's just say that the 'officer' being interviewed seemed to have a (not entirely surprising) lack of any idea what is required to get some monument tanks fully working, let alone fighting. I have to attribute that one being up and running to dumb luck that it was still in good shape and have to wonder where they're going to get the ammunition.
They had the same problem in Armenia back in the 90's: local volunteers would steal the monument tanks, and then you'd find them places where they discovered that the tank was beyond salvage, filled with concrete, etc etc. They'll have that problem with the one in your earlier video. Traced it down, it's the monument in Druzhkovka (my picture is older for it and had no number). They're going to have a devil of a time getting the concrete out of the gun.
Yes, T-34s are not at all good weapons anymore in the modern era. Especially not after having been used as monuments for decades. That is why I came up with it. If you are desperate enough to start pulling T-34s of monuments to have armoured vehicles, than you must be severely short of good equipment. And what is the diiference between local militias and Donbass militias? As far as I know, the Donbass militia is made up of several local and foreign volunteer groups.
But yes, as mentioned already, they could be selling them as well.
Yes, T-34s are not at all good weapons anymore in the modern era. Especially not after having been used as monuments for decades. That is why I came up with it. If you are desperate enough to start pulling T-34s of monuments to have armoured vehicles, than you must be severely short of good equipment. And what is the diiference between local militias and Donbass militias? As far as I know, the Donbass militia is made up of several local and foreign volunteer groups.
But yes, as mentioned already, they could be selling them as well.
These guys sound like locals who are not really aware of which end of the gun the bullet comes out. You get that type in rebellions. This is in no way indicative of the weapon needs of the Donbass separatist military. As has been said, it's more likely they're selling them for funds. Weirdly, this is actually a war crime (as is melting them down for scrap) but is a fairly minor one.
On the subject of the T-34. Actually, the T-34-85 is passable in a pinch. It can't take a hit, but the weapon (if intact) is decent. It will make a mess of most IFVs and may or may not penetrate side and rear armor on an MBT, and has the advantage that reactive armor isn't as effective against it. Downside is that it might as well be made of tinfoil. Basically an ambush only weapon.
Interesting new vehicle the Ukrainians have came out with. Well I think its new, its certainly no Wolfound. It reminds me a bit of something the Italians (or was it the French) are using.
Damn that would look so good as a S.T.A.L.K.E.R. vehicle.
State Enterprise "Lviv armored plant" began serial production of Ukrainian military armored light class "Dozor-B." According to the director Alexander LBZ Ostaptsa to perform goszadaniya, until July of this year to be produced 40 units of "Watch". It is reported "Day".
Wyrmalla wrote: Interesting new vehicle the Ukrainians have came out with. Well I think its new, its certainly no Wolfound. It reminds me a bit of something the Italians (or was it the French) are using.
Damn that would look so good as a S.T.A.L.K.E.R. vehicle.
State Enterprise "Lviv armored plant" began serial production of Ukrainian military armored light class "Dozor-B." According to the director Alexander LBZ Ostaptsa to perform goszadaniya, until July of this year to be produced 40 units of "Watch". It is reported "Day".
Looks similar to a shorland or a 4 wheel version of the hussar.
In March 2014 Russia launched a criminal case against Yarosh, and some members (including party leader Oleh Tyahnybok) of Svoboda and UNA-UNSO, for "organizing an armed gang" that had allegedly fought against Russian 76th Guards Air Assault Division in a First Chechen War and for "public calls for extremism and public calls for terrorism".
A bit hilarious that Russia is charging him for organizing a militia in the Chechen war but all those russian soldiers doing the same in Ukraine are heroes who are just away on holiday
I don't think Ukraine is doing any favors appointing Yarosh to anything, the guy is crazy ultranationalist and certainly isn't going to help their position in the long run methinks.
Putin actually lied to the world and no one's really called him on it.
He specifically said that there were no Russian troops in Crimea and that they wouldn't annex it.
Then a year later he's interviewed saying that he'd sent Special forces to Crimea and obviously they did annex it.
Then in a tank battle there was evidence of Russian tanks in Ukraine. The rebel tanks were engaging the Ukrainian tanks at 7KM but the Ukraine only has tanks capable of engaging at 5KM or less. Supposedly only the latest Russian tanks are able to do this
“Journalists are taught to report both sides,” Stengel told me with frustration. “When the Kremlin says there are no Russian soldiers in Crimea they have to repeat it. How do you combat someone who just makes stuff up?”
A really interesting, and mildly horrifying, article. Thanks for posting it reds8n.
Agreed. I liked very much to read it, it pose many interesting questions/ I like how it suggests that Russia has some kind of dark masterplan to destroy 'truth'
The last paragraph was great:
I began to wonder whether the very idea of information-psychological war – with its suggestion that Russia had discovered a shadowy weapon for which the west has no answer – was itself a species of information warfare. Perhaps the encyclopedia, and talk of “invisible radiation” that could override “biological defences”, was simply one more bluff – like the fake nuclear weapons that were paraded through Red Square in order to lead overeager western analysts down a hall of mirrors. And if this was simply a 21st-century update of that classic example of “reflexive control”, inducing your enemy to do what you want him to – then, I wondered, was this essay, the one you are reading, part of the plan?
And y̶e̶s̶ no, before anyone asks, R̶u̶s̶s̶i̶a̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶i̶n̶d̶e̶e̶d̶ ̶r̶u̶l̶e̶d̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶A̶l̶p̶h̶a̶ ̶L̶e̶g̶i̶o̶n̶ Russia is not at all ruled by the Alpha Legion.
And y̶e̶s̶ no, before anyone asks, R̶u̶s̶s̶i̶a̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶i̶n̶d̶e̶e̶d̶ ̶r̶u̶l̶e̶d̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶A̶l̶p̶h̶a̶ ̶L̶e̶g̶i̶o̶n̶ Russia is not at all ruled by the Alpha Legion.
ULAN-UDE, Russia -- Journalists at a Siberian newspaper say they spent three days using scissors to cut an article about a Russian soldier who was wounded fighting alongside pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine out of 50,000 copies of the publication.
Tank crewman Dorzhi Batonmukuyev's accounts of fighting in eastern Ukraine have added to what Kyiv and NATO say are incontrovertible evidence of direct Russian military support for the rebels in a conflict with government forces that has killed more than 6,000 people since April 2014.
Is having a counter argument that much of a threat to the Kremlin? I suppose they just want to put the boot down on anyone who disagrees, whatever the degree. That or the scope of their paid trolls mission statement is to just attack anyone and everyone without needing a direct order from their bosses.
Do the Russian people really believe all the propaganda though? The Kremlin might be throwing their view of things, but what does that matter if people are just ignoring them? Hmn, though I suppose their intent is just to spout so much gak that the lowest common denominator picks up on it and out shouts everyone else. Que revolution then hopefully. ...Ah, or more likely another Tiananmen Square given Moscow's attitude to people who don't want to be under their thumb.
Ukrainian Parliament Bans Communist, Nazi Propaganda
RFE Thursday 9th April, 2015
ukrainian parliament bans communist, nazi propaganda
Ukraine's parliament has voted to ban "propaganda of the totalitarian communist and Nazi regimes," a major rebuke to the country's Soviet-era masters in Moscow and to Russia.
A total of 254 members of the 450-seat Vekhovna Rada voted on April 9 in favor of the legislation in the former Soviet republic, which is deeply at odds with Russia over its annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in a conflict that has killed more than 6,000 people.
Under the legislation, the communist government that ruled between 1917 and 1991 -- the Soviet era -- is condemned as a criminal regime that conducted policies of state terror.
Its symbols and propaganda are banned -- a measure that, if implemented thoroughly, would require the demolition of monuments to Bolshevik Revolution leader Vladimir Lenin and other Soviet-era images that remain.
The legislation was initiated by the government and will become law when it is officially published, possibly on April 10.
It applies the same treatment to the Nazi regime, which occupied and controlled much of Ukraine during World War II before being driven out by Soviet forces.
Also on April 9, Ukrainian lawmakers adopted a law on the legal status and honoring the memory of participants to the struggle for Ukraine's independence in the 20th century, including groups that fought against Nazi Germany and Soviet authorities.
Another law adopted by the Ukrainian parliament on April 9 allows public access to all documents classified by the Soviet-era authorities as secret.
The lawmakers also adopted another law on April 9, according to which, Ukraine will mark May 8 as the Day of Remembrance and Reconciliation for Those Who Lost Their Lives during World War II, in 1939-1945.
The law says that May 9 will be marked as Victory Day as usual but not in the Great Patriotic War as it is still being marked in Russia and many other former Soviet Republics but as the end of World War II.
On April 7, Ukraine's First Lady Maryna Poroshenko attended a "Remembrance Poppy" event as part of events marking the 70th anniversary of the Nazi surrender, a move many saw as another attempt to change symbolism of the victory in World War II.
Russian celebrations of the World War II victory as the product of unity among Soviet republics are ringing hollow to many in Ukraine because of Moscow's takeover of the Crimea and its support for separatists fighting Ukrainian government forces in a conflict that has killed more than 6,000 people since April last year.
The Kremlin has portrayed the ouster of Moscow-backed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 as a U.S.-supported coup by fascists, and compares the pro-Western government now in power in Kyiv to Nazis.
The laws adopted by the Ukrainian parliament on April 9 are seen as part of a shift away Soviet imagery Kyiv says the Kremlin is using to influence neighbors and promote self-serving myths about World War II amid the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
With reporting by UNIAN and AFP
The funny part is that Ukraine was basically found by communists.
They may have aided the nationalists in the early twentieth century to found the state (or a state at least similar to modern Ukraine), but that's sort of glazing over the history after that point. Youknow all the genocide and what not.
If a guy gives you an apple then punches you in the face afterwards (oh and deports you to the back of beyond) are you supposed to still like him because he gave you the apple?
Hmn, I wonder if this law will have an effect on Chernobyl at all? =P
The funny part is that Ukraine was basically found by communists.
They may have aided the nationalists in the early twentieth century to found the state (or a state at least similar to modern Ukraine), but that's sort of glazing over the history after that point. Youknow all the genocide and what not.
If a guy gives you an apple then punches you in the face afterwards (oh and deports you to the back of beyond) are you supposed to still like him because he gave you the apple?
Hmn, I wonder if this law will have an effect on Chernobyl at all? =P
If not for the Communists, Ukraine would not exist today, it would be even less than a province of Russia. There would be no Ukrainian culture or language, nothing. The Russian Empire tried to destroy Ukrainian identity. It was communists who set up several independent Ukrainian states, and after Ukraine was conquered and made part of Poland, it was the Soviets who liberated it and made Ukraine into one single republic within the Soviet Union. This was the first time in history Ukraine was united. The Soviets also began a policy of Ukrainization, they encouraged Ukrainian language and traditional culture. If not for them, what is now Ukraine would just be parts of Russia. The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia. And if that was not enough, it was also the communists who saved the Ukrainian people from total extermination at the hands of the Nazis. The Nazis had plans to eventually exterminate all Ukrainians and repopulate the area with ethnic Germans. Again, without the communists, the Ukrainian people would not exist today. It would be fitting if the Ukrainians showed some more respect to the Soviets. But no, they pull down statues of Lenin, the man who is essentially responsible for the existence of Ukraine, and instead put up statues of Bandera, the man who wanted to sell out Ukraine to the nazis and whose troops committed genocide on the Polish minority in Western Ukraine. Such a great example for Ukrainian children, don't you think?
And regardless of the above, this law has no purpose but to spite ethnic Russians, who often see symbols like the Red Star, Lenin and the hammer and sickle as national symbols. It's only effect will be even more increase in tensions between ethnic Ukrainians and Russians. The only good thing to come from that law is that now the Azov batallion and scum like them have to change their symbols. Altough I am afraid they are going to get around this.
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see if they apply the law to things like the Azov Battalion, given that they're operating under the auspices of the Ministry of the Interior if I'm not mistaken.
The central symbol in their heraldry is certainly very reminiscent of that of the 2nd SS Panzer Division, though "upside-down" and elongated essentially.
The funny part is that Ukraine was basically found by communists.
They may have aided the nationalists in the early twentieth century to found the state (or a state at least similar to modern Ukraine), but that's sort of glazing over the history after that point. Youknow all the genocide and what not.
If a guy gives you an apple then punches you in the face afterwards (oh and deports you to the back of beyond) are you supposed to still like him because he gave you the apple?
Hmn, I wonder if this law will have an effect on Chernobyl at all? =P
If not for the Communists, Ukraine would not exist today, it would be even less than a province of Russia. There would be no Ukrainian culture or language, nothing. The Russian Empire tried to destroy Ukrainian identity. It was communists who set up several independent Ukrainian states, and after Ukraine was conquered and made part of Poland, it was the Soviets who liberated it and made Ukraine into one single republic within the Soviet Union. This was the first time in history Ukraine was united. The Soviets also began a policy of Ukrainization, they encouraged Ukrainian language and traditional culture. If not for them, what is now Ukraine would just be parts of Russia. The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia.
And if that was not enough, it was also the communists who saved the Ukrainian people from total extermination at the hands of the Nazis. The Nazis had plans to eventually exterminate all Ukrainians and repopulate the area with ethnic Germans.
Again, without the communists, the Ukrainian people would not exist today.
It would be fitting if the Ukrainians showed some more respect to the Soviets. But no, they pull down statues of Lenin, the man who is essentially responsible for the existence of Ukraine, and instead put up statues of Bandera, the man who wanted to sell out Ukraine to the nazis and whose troops committed genocide on the Polish minority in Western Ukraine. Such a great example for Ukrainian children, don't you think?
And regardless of the above, this law has no purpose but to spite ethnic Russians, who often see symbols like the Red Star, Lenin and the hammer and sickle as national symbols. It's only effect will be even more increase in tensions between ethnic Ukrainians and Russians.
The only good thing to come from that law is that now the Azov batallion and scum like them have to change their symbols. Altough I am afraid they are going to get around this.
We saved you, only to oppress you for fifty years, then try and steal some of your country twenty years later, why are you being so mean to us?!?!!?
Iron_Captain wrote: The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia.
I'm sure that the people of Kyiv and Zhytomir will be glad to know that the loss of about 1/5th their combined populations was not part of the holodomor and merely Russophobia on their part.
In post-Soviet Russia, you don’t make memes. Memes make (or unmake?) you.
That is, at least, the only conclusion we can draw from an announcement made this week by Russia’s three-year-old media agency/Internet censor Roskomnadzor, which made it illegal to publish any Internet meme that depicts a public figure in a way that has nothing to do with his “personality.”
Sad Keanu? Nope.
Sad Putin? Absolutely not.
“These ways of using [celebrities’ images] violate the laws governing personal data and harm the honor, dignity and business of public figures,” reads the policy announcement from Roskomnadzor.
To be clear, this isn’t a new law passed by parliament or anything — it’s just a (pretty startling) clarification of existing policy, published to the popular social network Vkontakte. According to Russian media, the announcement came in light of a lawsuit filed by the Russian singer Valeri Syutkin, who sued an irreverent Wikipedia-style culture site over an image macro that paired his picture with some less-than-tasteful lyrics from another artist’s song. On Tuesday, a Moscow judge ruled for Syutkin, prompting the Roskomnadzor to publish an update to its “personal data laws.”
Those laws now ban, per Roskomnadzor’s announcement, memes that picture public figures in a way that “has no relation to [their] personality,” parody accounts and parody Web sites. If a public figure believes such a site or meme has been made about him, the announcement continues, he can report them to the Roskomnadzor, which — in addition to overseeing Russia’s Internet censorship program — can file claims in court. Web sites are essentially given the choice of blocking the offending content in Russia, or seeing their whole sites get blocked across the country.
If that sounds crazy to U.S. readers, it probably should: U.S. law gives a very, very wide berth to Internet speech, even when it depicts private people or children — and especially when it depicts public figures.
Russia, on the other hand, has taken a series of steps to increase government control of the Internet in recent months. Just last August, Russia enacted a law that forced all bloggers with more than 3,000 daily readers to register with the Roskomnadzor, basically outlawing anonymous blogs. Earlier in the year, Russia approved a law that lets Roskomnadzor unilaterally block Web sites without explanation; the sites of prominent Putin critics were among the first to go dark.
It is impossible to know, of course, exactly how much of the Russian Internet will be affected by the change and to what degree this new policy will be pursued or enforced. (It is worth noting that public figures have to take their complaints to the Roskomnadzor, which many presumably will not do.)
Still, if the policy is enforced, the implications for the Russian memeosphere could be huge: According to a recent academic census of English-speaking memes, nearly a third of the Internet’s most popular memes depict a specific person. Just think of how many excellent memes depict Vladimir Putin!
... what an interesting idea..
.. we'll be sure to raise this at the next Dakka overlords Correctional Thinking seminar.
Quick, everyone post sad Putin-in-drag Memes on all the most popular sites in the internet!
I highly doubt Reddit, Facebook, Tumblr. Twitter etc. are going to block images from potentially thousands of individual users on account of a law from another country which is not reflective of the laws used by most of their other major client bases.
So then Russia has the choice of either ignoring it, effectively saying they have no actual power over large websites and so this law will do absolutely nothing to anyone outside Russia, or blocking the site completely and really pissing off the russian population who use these sites.
Can't seem to find anything about it on google so I have no clue where this suddenly came from. Well, other then the article saying it showed up in Russia Today.
Soladrin wrote: A tiny a news article just popped on a Dutch news site that said Ukraine is going to start dismantling Tsjernobyl. This seems like very odd timing.
Funding and building of a new confinement has been ongoing for the last two decades. The plan was to dismantle it inside iirc.
Apparently revisionist history is on in Russia too. Yekaterinburg's House of Metenkov has abruptly closed a gallery of images depicting US and UK involvement in The Great Patriotic War.
Officially for unspecified technical reasons, but the staff stated that it was to avoid being seen as collaborators.
Yup the anniversary's coming up, so a great time for the government to stir up patriotism. Even better if the images you're showing only include Russian figures. If the West is Russia's enemy now then best not to show how they fought together in an event that the government will be using to spin towards introverted nationalism.
We'll see if these "technical problems" are resolved after the anniversary, or the curators (with no guns to their heads obviously) decide that things have been put on hold too long and naturally the only option would be to cancel everything.
Iron_Captain wrote: The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia.
I'm sure that the people of Kyiv and Zhytomir will be glad to know that the loss of about 1/5th their combined populations was not part of the holodomor and merely Russophobia on their part.
Iron captain has to make his 40k-50k rubles per day somehow
The funny part is that Ukraine was basically found by communists.
They may have aided the nationalists in the early twentieth century to found the state (or a state at least similar to modern Ukraine), but that's sort of glazing over the history after that point. Youknow all the genocide and what not.
If a guy gives you an apple then punches you in the face afterwards (oh and deports you to the back of beyond) are you supposed to still like him because he gave you the apple?
Hmn, I wonder if this law will have an effect on Chernobyl at all? =P
If not for the Communists, Ukraine would not exist today, it would be even less than a province of Russia. There would be no Ukrainian culture or language, nothing. The Russian Empire tried to destroy Ukrainian identity. It was communists who set up several independent Ukrainian states, and after Ukraine was conquered and made part of Poland, it was the Soviets who liberated it and made Ukraine into one single republic within the Soviet Union. This was the first time in history Ukraine was united. The Soviets also began a policy of Ukrainization, they encouraged Ukrainian language and traditional culture. If not for them, what is now Ukraine would just be parts of Russia. The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia.
And if that was not enough, it was also the communists who saved the Ukrainian people from total extermination at the hands of the Nazis. The Nazis had plans to eventually exterminate all Ukrainians and repopulate the area with ethnic Germans.
Again, without the communists, the Ukrainian people would not exist today.
It would be fitting if the Ukrainians showed some more respect to the Soviets. But no, they pull down statues of Lenin, the man who is essentially responsible for the existence of Ukraine, and instead put up statues of Bandera, the man who wanted to sell out Ukraine to the nazis and whose troops committed genocide on the Polish minority in Western Ukraine. Such a great example for Ukrainian children, don't you think?
And regardless of the above, this law has no purpose but to spite ethnic Russians, who often see symbols like the Red Star, Lenin and the hammer and sickle as national symbols. It's only effect will be even more increase in tensions between ethnic Ukrainians and Russians.
The only good thing to come from that law is that now the Azov batallion and scum like them have to change their symbols. Altough I am afraid they are going to get around this.
We saved you, only to oppress you for fifty years, then try and steal some of your country twenty years later, why are you being so mean to us?!?!!?
How exactly did the Soviets oppress the Ukrainians? Define oppression? And did you also know that many Soviets were in fact, Ukrainians? Did they oppress themselves?
BaronIveagh wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote: The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia.
I'm sure that the people of Kyiv and Zhytomir will be glad to know that the loss of about 1/5th their combined populations was not part of the holodomor and merely Russophobia on their part.
You should brush up your geography a bit. Kiev and Zhitomir are in central, not western Ukraine. The area that is now western Ukraine was not even part of Ukraine or the Soviet Union during the Holodomor.
Now take a look at this map:
Notice that the areas hit hardest by the famine were actually in Russia and Eastern Ukraine? Kiev suffered, yes. But so did Orenburg. Why do people from Kiev and Lvov nowadays call this a genocide, but people from Orenburg or Lugansk not? It is only for political reasons that people in Lvov exploit this. They abuse the terrible suffering of the Holodomor for political gain, and twist it to conform to their own political goals. The Holdomor was a tragedy, no one has ever denied that. But to call it a genocide against Ukrainians is not just wrong, but also greatly offensive to the memory of the millions of ethnic Russians, Belarusians and Kazakhs that died because of this famine.
Iron_Captain wrote: The holodomor only happened in Eastern Ukrain and Southwestern Russia. It was not targeted at a specific people (Ukrainians and Russians both suffered) and was thus not a genocide. It is funny that the people that call this a genocide mainly come from Western Ukraine, which never even experienced it. It is just a part of their centuries-old Russophobia.
I'm sure that the people of Kyiv and Zhytomir will be glad to know that the loss of about 1/5th their combined populations was not part of the holodomor and merely Russophobia on their part.
Iron captain has to make his 40k-50k rubles per day somehow
If only I could make that much money just by writing comments on wargaming forums
You should brush up your geography a bit. Kiev and Zhitomir are in central, not western Ukraine. The area that is now western Ukraine was not even part of Ukraine or the Soviet Union during the Holodomor.
Yes, but you claimed that it only took place 'in the east' therefor, Central Ukraine could not possibly have lost people to it. it was all Western propaganda.
"Where did all bread disappear, I do not really know, maybe they have taken it all abroad. The authorities have confiscated it, removed from the villages, loaded grain into the railway coaches and took it away someplace. They have searched the houses, taken away everything to the smallest thing. All the vegetable gardens, all the cellars were raked out and everything was taken away.
Wealthy peasants were exiled into Siberia even before Holodomor during the “collectivization”. Communists came, collected everything. Children were crying beaten for that with the boots. It is terrifying to recall what happened. It was so dreadful that every day became engraved in my memory. People were lying everywhere as dead flies. The stench was awful. Many of our neighbors and acquaintances from our street died.
I have no idea how I managed to survive and stay alive. In 1933 we tried to survive the best we could. We collected grass, goose-foot, burdocks, rotten potatoes and made pancakes, soups from putrid beans or nettles.
Collected gley from the trees and ate it, ate sparrows, pigeons, cats, dead and live dogs. When there was still cattle, it was eaten first, then - the domestic animals. Some were eating their own children, I would have never been able to eat my child. One of our neighbours came home when her husband, suffering from severe starvation ate their own baby-daughter. This woman went crazy.
People were drinking a lot of water to fill stomachs, that is why the bellies and legs were swollen, the skin was swelling from the water as well. At that time the punishment for a stolen handful of grain was 5 years of prison. One was not allowed to go into the fields, the sparrows were pecking grain, though people were not allowed." Olexandra Rafalska, testifying on the conditions in Zhytomir
"There were no dogs and no cats. People died at work; it was of no concern whether your body was swollen, whether you could work, whether you have eaten, whether you could – you had to go and work. Otherwise – you are the enemy of the people.
Many people never lived to see the crops of 1933 and those crops were considerable. A more severe famine, other sufferings were awaiting ahead. Rye was starting to become ripe. Those who were still able made their way to the fields. This road, however, was covered with dead bodies, some could not reach the fields, some ate grain and died right away. The patrol was hunting them down, collecting everything, trampled down the collected spikelets, beat the people, came into their homes, seized everything. What they could not take – they burned."
From the memories of Galina Gubenko on the famine in Poltava
You claim that it's not genocide. That's just a sophistry, since it was against farmers instead of, say, Buddhists or Serbians, or Poles. Would the Shoah been any less an act of evil if it had been against carpenters and book binders instead of Roma and Jews? You complain about Russophobia, but ignore that many of these people are the descendants of the survivors who managed to flee Russians murdering them in horrific ways.
I don't like the US because it tortured my grandparents and kept them in a ghetto, for all intents and purposes.
I can only imagine how much some Ukrainians dislike you Russians for having murdered so many of their relatives before using them as meat shields against the Nazis.
One of those things I've always found nauseating about how the Russians portray the great patriotic war was how they trumpet their horrible casualties and say what a brave and patriotic thing it was.
The basic truth was that they let the Ukrainians, Estonians, and Latvians do most of that dying, but generally cut them out when it comes to talking about the great victory. Then it's always the glory of Russia, leading those other, lesser peoples of the Soviet Union to victory.
Don't get me wrong, the US spreads it's bs pretty thick. George Washington was a war criminal every bit as vile as any jumped up banana republic Generalissimo. But they at least have the decency to look embarrassed when confronted with it.
However, this largely seems to be relatively localized in one area.
Both sides have groups that are doing their own thing unfortunately, and lapses in control are to be expected even if both sides are truly serious about wanting the violence to stop.
They will have to break the cease fire at some point if they want to open a corridor between Crimea and Russia.
It was suggested that the cease fire would only last as long as the time it takes for a standard reorganising/regrouping that Russian forces go through after an operation, and that they would resume sometime after Easter if that was the case.
I'm not sure that could be accomplished while maintaining any sort of pretense of non-involvement of regular Russian Federation forces, if for no other reason than simple logistics & coordination, and that would open up a whole new level of international...awkwardness.
A ~150-200 mile offensive drive just not something that could be accomplished by "self defense forces" (despite how otherwise incompetent the Ukrainian government may be), particularly now that Ukraine has had the opportunity to reinforce Mariupol and other areas.
My guess is that Russia will just bridge the Kerch Straight and call it good on that account.
I find it amusing that you've all concluded the Russians are in Ukraine. Based on American intel.
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/cr-cdef/14-15/c1415049.asp Commission de la défense nationale et des forces armées
Mercredi 25 mars 2015
Séance de 9 heures
Compte rendu n° 49
Présidence de Mme Patricia Adam, présidente
Committee on National Defence and Armed Forces
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Session 9:00
Report No. 49
Ms. Patricia Adam presidency, President
Spoiler:
The meeting opened at nine.
Madam President Patricia Adam. General, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to welcome General Christophe Gomart, director of military intelligence for a hearing on the bill on intelligence.
We continue in effect with you the cycle of our hearings on the subject, our commission is being asked for its opinion. The Military Intelligence Directorate (DRM) is part of the so-called intelligence community and as such is directly affected by this bill. Your hearing will allow us to better understand the issues.
General Christophe Gomart. Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I am honored to be heard today by your commission. Before taking the head of the Military Intelligence Directorate in 2013, I had the chance to order special operations from 2011 to 2013; before, I was deputy national intelligence coordinator Bernard Bajolet - 2008 to 2011 - head of the office and booked the cabinet minister of defense - from 2006 to 2008. This course allows me to have a broad vision of the intelligence and everything related to its specificity.
I propose to begin by briefly presenting the direction of military intelligence before discussing the state of the threat and its major issues and conclude with my appreciation of the bill, which seems to be going in the right direction.
Foch said: "In war, we do what we can with what we know; order a lot, you should know a lot. " It is in this spirit that I see the action of the DRM, the intelligence service of the armed at a time when our soldiers are engaged in many operations abroad and in the country. We contribute - that's the essence of my work - autonomous situation assessment of military leaders at all levels and policy makers in the selection of military options.
DRM is one of the six intelligence services of our national community, in which it holds a special place due to its missions and organization. Intelligence service of armies, it is subordinate to the Chief of Staff (ECS). It therefore depends armies to all its human, material and financial, and the director that I am also the minister's adviser on intelligence of military interest. DRM is an autonomous specialized service that is discreet, but not secretly. Our expertise is that of military intelligence interest, as recalled by the National Policy Plan intelligence (PNOR) 2014-2019, which is a defense secret document to define the scope of each service, which I seems essential. My scope is interested in parts of the forces, military and paramilitary, state or not, of our adversaries and their environment that strictly belong only to areas of military interest, that is to say having or likely to have consequences on our strengths and our national interests. Our scope is broad: it covers both direct support to military operations - in Iraq, the Sahel, Central - anticipating crises such as Ukraine or Libya, and ongoing business intelligence including monitoring of major potentially dangerous military powers such as China or Russia.
We note the ongoing challenge due to the integrated nature of DRM, which allows him to have the full range of capabilities needed to develop intelligence.
These are, first, the direction of research, being fully involved in the work of the group's strategic anticipation Chief of Defence Staff and promoting short loop operation; second, intelligence gathering, as we have - either personally or because of the provision by the armies - a number of technical sensors - electromagnetic and image - and humans in all areas ; thirdly, analysis and exploitation of the information gathered by the crossing of geographical and thematic expertise; Fourth, and finally, the dissemination of that information developed granted appropriate recipients.
DRM is based in Paris, Creil and Strasbourg, and nine support centers spread across the globe. We also contribute to operations by continuously projection of about a hundred people in the theater of operations. DRM employs 1600 people, 80% from all armed personnel, services and gendarmerie, and 20% of civilian personnel. We suffer for the military personnel category of deficiencies in the implementation of our staff rare specialty staff, including interpreters images and linguists. The 20% of civilian staff are mostly officials. We are also fortunate to have highly qualified staff under contract, primarily as geographic and thematic analysts. Our wealth lies in the alchemy of military experts and experienced civilian or just out of school.
The military planning law (LPM) must consolidate our research capacity, especially in the satellite field. We eagerly await the arrival of the constellation MUSIS, scheduled for 2018, and CERES, to be launched in 2020. These satellites pérenniseront our strategic capabilities of the original image information and electromagnetic origin. We are also vigilant on the realization of other programs such as the payload of airborne electronic warfare to succeed the C-160 Gabriel, the asset acquisition of light aircraft for surveillance and reconnaissance, such as those currently leased on theaters operations and which are highly effective and the MALE drones prospects by including a signals intelligence load (SIGINT).
The attacks of January cruelly reminded the news of the threat that we face. DRM is primarily interested in fighting the armed opponent in the theaters of Saharan-Sahelian Operations, Central, Iraq or Lebanon. The area of intelligence interest, however, is much larger than the area of operations in the strict sense; we have to also look at what is happening around in the Persian Gulf, the Levant at large, in North Africa and especially in Libya, Nigeria and Cameroon to include major hot areas.
This opponent has radically changed over the last decade. The globalization of the threat contemplated by the last two White Papers is now a reality in all areas. We face a very reactive enemy, modern, able to adapt to his opponents and having political-strategic objectives well defined. The opponent has appropriated the global information revolution in which we are immersed. He mastered modern network means for recruiting, influence and communicate. Online publications or videos of Daech illustrate how our enemy knows how to use the flaws of our "connected societies."
This modernity opponent also allows it to be very responsive and adapt in front of us on the ground. It easily combines the conventional modes of action and asymmetric modes of action: the terrorist armed groups (GAT) North Mali and ride classic ambush against the multinational forces and continue to pose improvised explosive device while conducting Daech major offensives in Iraq and Syria and launching suicide attacks in the heart of Baghdad. Knowing our action restrictions Daech knows blend into the population, borrow uniforms of Iraqi security forces or store their weapons in hospitals or mosques. Having learned of the first battles against the Serval force, the GAT reviewed their procedures: they do not employ the means of communication that we can intercept and now prefer to travel on a motorcycle rather than columns pickup.
The continuity of this threat is the new fact that mobilizes all intelligence services. The armed fight this enemy "off" in Iraq and the Sahel, but the opponent is more intimate with the threat to the country that I mentioned earlier. So there is a real continuity between the opponent comes to attack us on the national and the soil that is now in the Sahel or Iraq.
Beyond finding the threat - our purpose - we also take into account the changing environment in which we operate. We have to cope with an increase in stress and phenomenal growth of information to process. When General Bolelli, my predecessor, was speaking to you two years ago, DRM supported mainly the Afghan theater and the last gasps of the Ivorian theater; Today, we are engaged throughout the Sahel-Saharan Africa, Central Africa, Iraq and Lebanon. The real explosion in the volume of information is already a reality and is a phenomenon that will in the coming years. It becomes even more difficult to discriminate the right information in such mass.
Recognizing these challenges, we have initiated the DRM on a vast transformation for nearly two years. The main objective is to keep the initiative on our opponent. We aim to continue to guarantee the CEMA freedom of action in its capacity for autonomous situation assessment. So we review in depth our organization and procedures to optimize, modernize and adapt. We intend to fully exploit existing and acquired future of DRM equipment programs.
Among our projects, I would like to highlight three. First, the DRM now has a fused geospatial intelligence capability - that the Anglo-Saxons call GEOINT (geospatial intelligence) - within a center dedicated to Creil, central joint geospatial intelligence, real startups whose the ambition is to provide a complete information, accurate, location-aware and updated on a digital medium suitable for both strategic decision makers as DRM analysts and tactical commanders in the field; we must see this as a kind of Google Earth with a viewer to see, in near real time, what happens anywhere in the world.
Second, we continue our full involvement in the sharing of programs between the intelligence services. The means of the DGSE, which DRM, ISB, DNRED and DPSD access, allow us to benefit from significant technical capacity and dimensioning and guide our reorganization.
Thirdly, the management of human resources is the subject of special attention. We have a desperate need for manpower, the risk of being suffocated and not properly respond to requests. So I am now in a position to follow the countries classified P3 category, being obliged to focus my resources on the current crises. Our people are not fully realized and we are facing a chronic lack of staff in key specialties such as pictures interpreters and linguists. The issues that I have described advocate for strengthening our workforce to enable us to handle this exponential mass of information coming to us and to quickly detect the warning signs, vital capacity for intelligence. In comparison, the DGSE has a larger volume of military personnel than the DRM - including a larger number of patented the War College officers. It was decided, following the attacks, enhance the strength of 185 personnel to the DGSE - at least thirty soldiers, who do not necessarily go to the DRM - and 65 DPSD. It is also necessary that we can offer attractive career prospects personnel, both military and civilian. Two tracks are already being explored but have not yet completed: looking for a job status for our civilian personnel and development of a real inter mobility.
We strive to other challenges, such as the provision of information systems and robust, resilient communication, taking into account the move to Balard, reflecting on the opportunities for stability and consistency offered by Basic Creil where we are already established, or the consolidation of a database center that we just be delivered.
I also believe that we must continue the inter operational cooperation initiated in support of operations in Iraq to the Hermès cell - which I wanted to create, supported in this by the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Minister of Defence - which allows all intelligence services of being in the center of planning and conduct of operations to military operations currently in Iraq. I am convinced that the creation of Hermes, which is a first, will bring us a lot: it has paved the way for greater interaction between services, a dynamic and effective exchange of information in favor of the action, military in this case. Current and future security challenges, especially in the country, campaigning for the continuation and consolidation of similar devices.
About the Bill relating to information that is submitted to you, I would make three introductory remarks. First, this project sticks to the present realities and future of our intelligence services on their means and their missions; second, it provides a clear framework and applicable to all the intelligence services; Third, I think this law will protect our citizens well.
The project defines the duties of the intelligence services, specify the purpose for which services may use the intelligence techniques provided by law, fixed intelligence techniques and their conditions of implementation and control procedures defined by an administrative authority and independent judicial review.
For the DRM, it is a project complete and coherent legislation that respects a balance between operational needs of services and control essential for the guarantee of civil liberties. It also sits the legitimacy of the action of services. This project complements the existing system without compromising the already provided by existing legislative provisions capabilities.
The objectives defined in Title I, for which the services can implement intelligence techniques, do not force DRM. In this context, it can fulfill all its missions, operations support to business intelligence.
It does not distinguish between services that affect the country and those who act out. DRM is essentially outside the national territory for intelligence techniques addressed by this project. However, it has sensors stationed on our territory: these include listening Giens centers and departments and communities overseas Mayotte, Pointe-à-Pitre, Papeete Tontouta and buildings the Navy such as Dupuy de Lome and other buildings shipping ways electromagnetic interception. It is primarily concerned with international surveillance and maintenance of those on radio spectrum already provided for in the 1991 Act.
For DRM Title V dealing with intelligence techniques require authorization is the main contribution of this bill. It effectively defines provisions for international monitoring. These take into account the monitoring of information transmitted or received abroad from sensors on the national territory. They take particular account of the evolution of electronic communications techniques that go far beyond simple telephony as it was defined in the law of 1991. This is an advanced and vitally important in the light of operational need and new electronic communication.
The mechanism provided for this project, which appears to be more flexible than that in force for security interceptions, however, have strong guarantees: for communications that refer to national identifiers, conservation is the same procedure as that provided for other intelligence techniques under the control of the national intelligence oversight technical Commission (CNCTR). Furthermore, CNCTR ensures good conditions for the implementation of these measures.
In Article 5, the project incorporates the provisions of the terrestrial exception provided for in Article 20 of the 1991 Act DRM considers that the maintenance of these provisions is imperative, insofar scanning the radio spectrum from sensors located on the national territory allows the detection of weak signals which, once identified, can be treated, for example, in the context of international monitoring measures or access to technical data connection.
I wish to emphasize the last two points that seem important because they enable services to achieve their missions in better conditions. First, the provisions relating to conditions in which will be taken regulatory and individual acts regarding the organization, management and operation of services, are a useful complement to the existing system which aims to ensure the anonymity of the agents; second, Article 9 of the draft, which supplements Article 41 of the 1978 Act relating to data files and freedoms, guarantees given to the necessary confidentiality of the action of services and respect for the secret National defense to a dispute relating to access to files, which are constantly increasing.
Finally, the definition of the new National Control Commission intelligence technical missions allow a real unification of licensing procedures and control. It will give us advance notice prior to implementation of information technologies require authorization and conduct subsequent verification of the implementation of these techniques. I think the work of this commission will be a real guarantee of respect for civil liberties.
The Director of Military Intelligence I therefore consider that the draft law will contribute to information relating to the maintenance and insurance of the effectiveness of the intelligence services. Our mission needs a coherent framework pressing control capabilities. I personally welcome this will guarantee us such a framework and I can assure you that all members of my service remain fully committed to their mission, with the main aim to contribute to the security of our citizens.
Madam President Patricia Adam. Since you mentioned the countries classified in category P3, can you tell us what are these countries?
General Christophe Gomart. We classify countries into three categories, category P1, which brings together the countries in crisis, or the subject of the security of France is directly at stake, category P3, made up of countries that we believe have a higher risk reduced to national security - P2 is obviously the intermediate category. I said that we do not give up any systematic monitoring of countries ranked P3: well, we continue to monitor what is happening in some of them. Given the constraints we face in staffing, however, we must stop to watch some countries, especially those in Latin America and the United States of America. We just follow them on theaters of military operations, whereas the defense military mission based in Washington is fully able to keep us informed on US military leaders in office and their orientations.
Frédéric Lefebvre. What are our relations with NATO base in Norfolk?
General Christophe Gomart. We have excellent relations with the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) and intelligence notes DRM also supply NATO reflection. In September, General Denis Mercier will succeed General Jean-Paul Paloméros to this post.
The real difficulty with NATO is that US intelligence is dominant, while the French intelligence is more or less considered - hence the importance for us to supply sufficiently commanders of the NATO French origin information. NATO announced that the Russians would invade Ukraine while according to the information of the DRM, nothing came to support this hypothesis - we had indeed found that the Russians had not deployed command or logistics, including field hospitals, to consider a military invasion and the units of second level had made no movement. Subsequently showed that we were right, because if Russian soldiers were actually seen in Ukraine, it was more of a ploy to put pressure on Ukrainian President Poroshenko as an attempted invasion.
Mr Philippe Nauche draftsman. Thank you for letting us share your beliefs about the bill relating to intelligence and your service.
You mentioned that this law was sticking to realities, it constituted a clear and enforceable framework and offered satisfactory guarantees in terms of guarantees of the rights of citizens, and have emphasized the international monitoring measures constituting the framework of your action. Can you tell us how you exercise your right away: the individuals and groups that you follow may be asked to come and go between France and abroad, make sure you follow the individuals concerned in all places, or are you asked to hand over to another service in certain circumstances?
Mr. Alain Moyne-Bressand. Can you tell us how is coordination between the civilian intelligence services and yours, military in nature? We know that in the past, the relationship between the intelligence services have been marked by a certain rivalry. Does the new organization will allow you to work hand in hand, in the interests of safety and the Republic - which should be a priority?
Moreover, we know that the Islamist extremist terrorism is to watch with the greatest attention. How would you take to identify and track terrorist leaders in the theaters of Malian and Iraqi operations, consisting of desert and mountain areas very difficult to access?
General Christophe Gomart. DRM has actually designed to work on the theater of operations and monitor everything that is likely to pose a threat to the French armed forces, and she monitors what is happening in Libya and can threaten troops in Niger, Chad and Mali. We follow the terrorist leaders and individuals - AQIM component, for example - but not necessarily the channels which may be appropriate Directorate General for External Security (DGSE) and the Directorate General of Internal Security (ISB) - the latter being leader.
The role of the Interagency cell Hermes precisely to cross the information available to the different services each acting within its perimeter. And the National Directorate of Customs Intelligence and Investigation (DNRED) she follows all sectors, as TRACFIN (Intelligence Processing and Action against illegal financial circuits), which observes the flow of funds and possible closures accounts. The different services can communicate with each other through the Hermes cell, but also the national coordinator of intelligence, which includes department heads around it at least once a month so that they take stock of the threat status and display their concern. So there is coordination between the services, which is of an operational aspect of a share in respect Hermès for the Levant theater of operations, the other between the DGSE, DRM and the Special Operations Command ( COS) for monitoring the Sahel terrorists.
This cooperation is in association with the Americans, who provide us with the means of aerial surveillance - including drones - to monitor jihadists become more difficult to trace since they no longer use that rarely means of communication who once would allow us to locate them. Terrorists are back to the old methods - particularly that of the courier - and in telephony, using short-range devices, whose influence is limited to a few kilometers. These new practices greatly complicate the interception of communications, which does not preclude that certain actions are successful. Thus he was able COS neutralize a number of jihadist leaders.
In summary, there is good coordination between the different services, all of which have specific capabilities, depending on the tasks assigned to them.
Daniel boisserie. I want to know how is the cooperation between France and other Western European countries. You mentioned the difficulty of recruiting linguists and interpreters picture. Can you explain what is the role of interpreters images, and what is their training? As for linguists, what are the most popular languages, and those where you have the most difficulty in finding staff? Finally, do not you think that the sharing of personal exercising these functions could be deeper, especially regarding the DGSE?
Édith Gueugneau. DRM is part of the French intelligence system coordinated by the National Intelligence Council (CNR), including the establishment in 2008 enabled a better sharing of knowledge and information in respect of each of liability perimeters. What is your assessment of the creation of RSS? Today, France must adopt effective and modern means, while having strengthened safeguards and high definition of protection of our nation. How do you think the draft law on intelligence can he afford to go further deal with the terrorist threat in hyperconnectée society?
General Christophe Gomart. Cooperation with the countries of Western Europe is good. DRM participating in two forums, one regularly bringing together the NATO countries around various topics. I remember that in one of these forums, we tried to force our hand about Ukraine. This shows the importance of having concrete and factual information: from this point of view, France has the means to assess the situation and make his point of view.
Cooperation is also done in the framework of bilateral relations, that is to say, information exchange. France, usually very good in terms of Africa, is able to provide information on this region to its partners in exchange for other information about areas where she collects less. We share a lot with the Germans, the Americans, the British and Swiss.
An image interpreter is a person able to locate a satellite image of the elements that you and I would not see, whether a missile is erected or not, to highlight the presence of a helicopter on the aft deck of a ship and identify exactly what type of device it is, to distinguish between shell impacts and shrubs, where other only see black spots. The initial basic training lasts at least six months, and there are additional continuous training in order to perform analysis even faster and precise. The exercise of this feature requires a good knowledge of the enemy capabilities to distinguish between military equipment and those that are not, and to be able, for example, to draw conclusions about how certain canons are arranged.
To form a Chinese linguist, it takes three years; Russian or Arabic, two years. So we have a vested interest in retaining the personnel concerned once they are trained, as the length of their training is a significant investment. Of course, we strive to share these features with other intelligence services. If we currently require linguists fluent in Tamasheq - one of the languages spoken in the Sahel - we do not know how long it will be useful to have such specialists, so we think about twice before bring in a personal that language training sector: it is better to use shared personnel. Also, when possible, we try to convert the linguists in a language that no longer has a major advantage for us and some of the many linguists we have trained Serbo-Croatian during the 1990s ont- they were transformed into the Russian specialists linguists. Similarly the crisis in Central Africa she has forced us to find people to talk Sango.
On this point, it seems to me, as leader of my counterparts from other services, which should engage a true reflection on the national level to determine if it would be possible to recruit in France Tamasheq speaking staff, Pashto or Dari - two languages including Afghanistan - in exchange for the issuance of a long-term visa or the allocation of French nationality. One of the obstacles that we face in recruiting is that our service is not necessarily the one offering the best compensation - and I'm not even talking about the positions offered by the private sector.
General Christophe Gomart.
Meeting about intelligence cooperation.
Interesting paragraph. Frédéric Lefebvre. What are our relations with NATO base in Norfolk?
General Christophe Gomart. We have excellent relations with the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) and intelligence notes DRM also supply NATO reflection. In September, General Denis Mercier will succeed General Jean-Paul Paloméros to this post.
The real difficulty with NATO is that US intelligence is dominant, while the French intelligence is more or less considered - hence the importance for us to supply sufficiently commanders of the NATO French origin information. NATO announced that the Russians would invade Ukraine while according to the information of the DRM, nothing came to support this hypothesis - we had indeed found that the Russians had not deployed command or logistics, including field hospitals, to consider a military invasion and the units of second level had made no movement. Subsequently showed that we were right, because if Russian soldiers were actually seen in Ukraine, it was more of a ploy to put pressure on Ukrainian President Poroshenko as an attempted invasion.
Mr Philippe Nauche draftsman. Thank you for letting us share your beliefs about the bill relating to intelligence and your service.
loki old fart wrote: I find it amusing that you've all concluded the Russians are in Ukraine. Based on American intel.
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/cr-cdef/14-15/c1415049.asp Commission de la défense nationale et des forces armées
Mercredi 25 mars 2015
Séance de 9 heures
Compte rendu n° 49
Présidence de Mme Patricia Adam, présidente
Committee on National Defence and Armed Forces
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Session 9:00
Report No. 49
Ms. Patricia Adam presidency, President
[spoiler]The meeting opened at nine.
Madam President Patricia Adam. General, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to welcome General Christophe Gomart, director of military intelligence for a hearing on the bill on intelligence.
We continue in effect with you the cycle of our hearings on the subject, our commission is being asked for its opinion. The Military Intelligence Directorate (DRM) is part of the so-called intelligence community and as such is directly affected by this bill. Your hearing will allow us to better understand the issues.
General Christophe Gomart. Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I am honored to be heard today by your commission. Before taking the head of the Military Intelligence Directorate in 2013, I had the chance to order special operations from 2011 to 2013; before, I was deputy national intelligence coordinator Bernard Bajolet - 2008 to 2011 - head of the office and booked the cabinet minister of defense - from 2006 to 2008. This course allows me to have a broad vision of the intelligence and everything related to its specificity.
I propose to begin by briefly presenting the direction of military intelligence before discussing the state of the threat and its major issues and conclude with my appreciation of the bill, which seems to be going in the right direction.
Foch said: "In war, we do what we can with what we know; order a lot, you should know a lot. " It is in this spirit that I see the action of the DRM, the intelligence service of the armed at a time when our soldiers are engaged in many operations abroad and in the country. We contribute - that's the essence of my work - autonomous situation assessment of military leaders at all levels and policy makers in the selection of military options.
DRM is one of the six intelligence services of our national community, in which it holds a special place due to its missions and organization. Intelligence service of armies, it is subordinate to the Chief of Staff (ECS). It therefore depends armies to all its human, material and financial, and the director that I am also the minister's adviser on intelligence of military interest. DRM is an autonomous specialized service that is discreet, but not secretly. Our expertise is that of military intelligence interest, as recalled by the National Policy Plan intelligence (PNOR) 2014-2019, which is a defense secret document to define the scope of each service, which I seems essential. My scope is interested in parts of the forces, military and paramilitary, state or not, of our adversaries and their environment that strictly belong only to areas of military interest, that is to say having or likely to have consequences on our strengths and our national interests. Our scope is broad: it covers both direct support to military operations - in Iraq, the Sahel, Central - anticipating crises such as Ukraine or Libya, and ongoing business intelligence including monitoring of major potentially dangerous military powers such as China or Russia.
We note the ongoing challenge due to the integrated nature of DRM, which allows him to have the full range of capabilities needed to develop intelligence.
These are, first, the direction of research, being fully involved in the work of the group's strategic anticipation Chief of Defence Staff and promoting short loop operation; second, intelligence gathering, as we have - either personally or because of the provision by the armies - a number of technical sensors - electromagnetic and image - and humans in all areas ; thirdly, analysis and exploitation of the information gathered by the crossing of geographical and thematic expertise; Fourth, and finally, the dissemination of that information developed granted appropriate recipients.
DRM is based in Paris, Creil and Strasbourg, and nine support centers spread across the globe. We also contribute to operations by continuously projection of about a hundred people in the theater of operations. DRM employs 1600 people, 80% from all armed personnel, services and gendarmerie, and 20% of civilian personnel. We suffer for the military personnel category of deficiencies in the implementation of our staff rare specialty staff, including interpreters images and linguists. The 20% of civilian staff are mostly officials. We are also fortunate to have highly qualified staff under contract, primarily as geographic and thematic analysts. Our wealth lies in the alchemy of military experts and experienced civilian or just out of school.
The military planning law (LPM) must consolidate our research capacity, especially in the satellite field. We eagerly await the arrival of the constellation MUSIS, scheduled for 2018, and CERES, to be launched in 2020. These satellites pérenniseront our strategic capabilities of the original image information and electromagnetic origin. We are also vigilant on the realization of other programs such as the payload of airborne electronic warfare to succeed the C-160 Gabriel, the asset acquisition of light aircraft for surveillance and reconnaissance, such as those currently leased on theaters operations and which are highly effective and the MALE drones prospects by including a signals intelligence load (SIGINT).
The attacks of January cruelly reminded the news of the threat that we face. DRM is primarily interested in fighting the armed opponent in the theaters of Saharan-Sahelian Operations, Central, Iraq or Lebanon. The area of intelligence interest, however, is much larger than the area of operations in the strict sense; we have to also look at what is happening around in the Persian Gulf, the Levant at large, in North Africa and especially in Libya, Nigeria and Cameroon to include major hot areas.
This opponent has radically changed over the last decade. The globalization of the threat contemplated by the last two White Papers is now a reality in all areas. We face a very reactive enemy, modern, able to adapt to his opponents and having political-strategic objectives well defined. The opponent has appropriated the global information revolution in which we are immersed. He mastered modern network means for recruiting, influence and communicate. Online publications or videos of Daech illustrate how our enemy knows how to use the flaws of our "connected societies."
This modernity opponent also allows it to be very responsive and adapt in front of us on the ground. It easily combines the conventional modes of action and asymmetric modes of action: the terrorist armed groups (GAT) North Mali and ride classic ambush against the multinational forces and continue to pose improvised explosive device while conducting Daech major offensives in Iraq and Syria and launching suicide attacks in the heart of Baghdad. Knowing our action restrictions Daech knows blend into the population, borrow uniforms of Iraqi security forces or store their weapons in hospitals or mosques. Having learned of the first battles against the Serval force, the GAT reviewed their procedures: they do not employ the means of communication that we can intercept and now prefer to travel on a motorcycle rather than columns pickup.
The continuity of this threat is the new fact that mobilizes all intelligence services. The armed fight this enemy "off" in Iraq and the Sahel, but the opponent is more intimate with the threat to the country that I mentioned earlier. So there is a real continuity between the opponent comes to attack us on the national and the soil that is now in the Sahel or Iraq.
Beyond finding the threat - our purpose - we also take into account the changing environment in which we operate. We have to cope with an increase in stress and phenomenal growth of information to process. When General Bolelli, my predecessor, was speaking to you two years ago, DRM supported mainly the Afghan theater and the last gasps of the Ivorian theater; Today, we are engaged throughout the Sahel-Saharan Africa, Central Africa, Iraq and Lebanon. The real explosion in the volume of information is already a reality and is a phenomenon that will in the coming years. It becomes even more difficult to discriminate the right information in such mass.
Recognizing these challenges, we have initiated the DRM on a vast transformation for nearly two years. The main objective is to keep the initiative on our opponent. We aim to continue to guarantee the CEMA freedom of action in its capacity for autonomous situation assessment. So we review in depth our organization and procedures to optimize, modernize and adapt. We intend to fully exploit existing and acquired future of DRM equipment programs.
Among our projects, I would like to highlight three. First, the DRM now has a fused geospatial intelligence capability - that the Anglo-Saxons call GEOINT (geospatial intelligence) - within a center dedicated to Creil, central joint geospatial intelligence, real startups whose the ambition is to provide a complete information, accurate, location-aware and updated on a digital medium suitable for both strategic decision makers as DRM analysts and tactical commanders in the field; we must see this as a kind of Google Earth with a viewer to see, in near real time, what happens anywhere in the world.
Second, we continue our full involvement in the sharing of programs between the intelligence services. The means of the DGSE, which DRM, ISB, DNRED and DPSD access, allow us to benefit from significant technical capacity and dimensioning and guide our reorganization.
Thirdly, the management of human resources is the subject of special attention. We have a desperate need for manpower, the risk of being suffocated and not properly respond to requests. So I am now in a position to follow the countries classified P3 category, being obliged to focus my resources on the current crises. Our people are not fully realized and we are facing a chronic lack of staff in key specialties such as pictures interpreters and linguists. The issues that I have described advocate for strengthening our workforce to enable us to handle this exponential mass of information coming to us and to quickly detect the warning signs, vital capacity for intelligence. In comparison, the DGSE has a larger volume of military personnel than the DRM - including a larger number of patented the War College officers. It was decided, following the attacks, enhance the strength of 185 personnel to the DGSE - at least thirty soldiers, who do not necessarily go to the DRM - and 65 DPSD. It is also necessary that we can offer attractive career prospects personnel, both military and civilian. Two tracks are already being explored but have not yet completed: looking for a job status for our civilian personnel and development of a real inter mobility.
We strive to other challenges, such as the provision of information systems and robust, resilient communication, taking into account the move to Balard, reflecting on the opportunities for stability and consistency offered by Basic Creil where we are already established, or the consolidation of a database center that we just be delivered.
I also believe that we must continue the inter operational cooperation initiated in support of operations in Iraq to the Hermès cell - which I wanted to create, supported in this by the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Minister of Defence - which allows all intelligence services of being in the center of planning and conduct of operations to military operations currently in Iraq. I am convinced that the creation of Hermes, which is a first, will bring us a lot: it has paved the way for greater interaction between services, a dynamic and effective exchange of information in favor of the action, military in this case. Current and future security challenges, especially in the country, campaigning for the continuation and consolidation of similar devices.
About the Bill relating to information that is submitted to you, I would make three introductory remarks. First, this project sticks to the present realities and future of our intelligence services on their means and their missions; second, it provides a clear framework and applicable to all the intelligence services; Third, I think this law will protect our citizens well.
The project defines the duties of the intelligence services, specify the purpose for which services may use the intelligence techniques provided by law, fixed intelligence techniques and their conditions of implementation and control procedures defined by an administrative authority and independent judicial review.
For the DRM, it is a project complete and coherent legislation that respects a balance between operational needs of services and control essential for the guarantee of civil liberties. It also sits the legitimacy of the action of services. This project complements the existing system without compromising the already provided by existing legislative provisions capabilities.
The objectives defined in Title I, for which the services can implement intelligence techniques, do not force DRM. In this context, it can fulfill all its missions, operations support to business intelligence.
It does not distinguish between services that affect the country and those who act out. DRM is essentially outside the national territory for intelligence techniques addressed by this project. However, it has sensors stationed on our territory: these include listening Giens centers and departments and communities overseas Mayotte, Pointe-à-Pitre, Papeete Tontouta and buildings the Navy such as Dupuy de Lome and other buildings shipping ways electromagnetic interception. It is primarily concerned with international surveillance and maintenance of those on radio spectrum already provided for in the 1991 Act.
For DRM Title V dealing with intelligence techniques require authorization is the main contribution of this bill. It effectively defines provisions for international monitoring. These take into account the monitoring of information transmitted or received abroad from sensors on the national territory. They take particular account of the evolution of electronic communications techniques that go far beyond simple telephony as it was defined in the law of 1991. This is an advanced and vitally important in the light of operational need and new electronic communication.
The mechanism provided for this project, which appears to be more flexible than that in force for security interceptions, however, have strong guarantees: for communications that refer to national identifiers, conservation is the same procedure as that provided for other intelligence techniques under the control of the national intelligence oversight technical Commission (CNCTR). Furthermore, CNCTR ensures good conditions for the implementation of these measures.
In Article 5, the project incorporates the provisions of the terrestrial exception provided for in Article 20 of the 1991 Act DRM considers that the maintenance of these provisions is imperative, insofar scanning the radio spectrum from sensors located on the national territory allows the detection of weak signals which, once identified, can be treated, for example, in the context of international monitoring measures or access to technical data connection.
I wish to emphasize the last two points that seem important because they enable services to achieve their missions in better conditions. First, the provisions relating to conditions in which will be taken regulatory and individual acts regarding the organization, management and operation of services, are a useful complement to the existing system which aims to ensure the anonymity of the agents; second, Article 9 of the draft, which supplements Article 41 of the 1978 Act relating to data files and freedoms, guarantees given to the necessary confidentiality of the action of services and respect for the secret National defense to a dispute relating to access to files, which are constantly increasing.
Finally, the definition of the new National Control Commission intelligence technical missions allow a real unification of licensing procedures and control. It will give us advance notice prior to implementation of information technologies require authorization and conduct subsequent verification of the implementation of these techniques. I think the work of this commission will be a real guarantee of respect for civil liberties.
The Director of Military Intelligence I therefore consider that the draft law will contribute to information relating to the maintenance and insurance of the effectiveness of the intelligence services. Our mission needs a coherent framework pressing control capabilities. I personally welcome this will guarantee us such a framework and I can assure you that all members of my service remain fully committed to their mission, with the main aim to contribute to the security of our citizens.
Madam President Patricia Adam. Since you mentioned the countries classified in category P3, can you tell us what are these countries?
General Christophe Gomart. We classify countries into three categories, category P1, which brings together the countries in crisis, or the subject of the security of France is directly at stake, category P3, made up of countries that we believe have a higher risk reduced to national security - P2 is obviously the intermediate category. I said that we do not give up any systematic monitoring of countries ranked P3: well, we continue to monitor what is happening in some of them. Given the constraints we face in staffing, however, we must stop to watch some countries, especially those in Latin America and the United States of America. We just follow them on theaters of military operations, whereas the defense military mission based in Washington is fully able to keep us informed on US military leaders in office and their orientations.
Frédéric Lefebvre. What are our relations with NATO base in Norfolk?
General Christophe Gomart. We have excellent relations with the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) and intelligence notes DRM also supply NATO reflection. In September, General Denis Mercier will succeed General Jean-Paul Paloméros to this post.
The real difficulty with NATO is that US intelligence is dominant, while the French intelligence is more or less considered - hence the importance for us to supply sufficiently commanders of the NATO French origin information. NATO announced that the Russians would invade Ukraine while according to the information of the DRM, nothing came to support this hypothesis - we had indeed found that the Russians had not deployed command or logistics, including field hospitals, to consider a military invasion and the units of second level had made no movement. Subsequently showed that we were right, because if Russian soldiers were actually seen in Ukraine, it was more of a ploy to put pressure on Ukrainian President Poroshenko as an attempted invasion.
Mr Philippe Nauche draftsman. Thank you for letting us share your beliefs about the bill relating to intelligence and your service.
You mentioned that this law was sticking to realities, it constituted a clear and enforceable framework and offered satisfactory guarantees in terms of guarantees of the rights of citizens, and have emphasized the international monitoring measures constituting the framework of your action. Can you tell us how you exercise your right away: the individuals and groups that you follow may be asked to come and go between France and abroad, make sure you follow the individuals concerned in all places, or are you asked to hand over to another service in certain circumstances?
Mr. Alain Moyne-Bressand. Can you tell us how is coordination between the civilian intelligence services and yours, military in nature? We know that in the past, the relationship between the intelligence services have been marked by a certain rivalry. Does the new organization will allow you to work hand in hand, in the interests of safety and the Republic - which should be a priority?
Moreover, we know that the Islamist extremist terrorism is to watch with the greatest attention. How would you take to identify and track terrorist leaders in the theaters of Malian and Iraqi operations, consisting of desert and mountain areas very difficult to access?
General Christophe Gomart. DRM has actually designed to work on the theater of operations and monitor everything that is likely to pose a threat to the French armed forces, and she monitors what is happening in Libya and can threaten troops in Niger, Chad and Mali. We follow the terrorist leaders and individuals - AQIM component, for example - but not necessarily the channels which may be appropriate Directorate General for External Security (DGSE) and the Directorate General of Internal Security (ISB) - the latter being leader.
The role of the Interagency cell Hermes precisely to cross the information available to the different services each acting within its perimeter. And the National Directorate of Customs Intelligence and Investigation (DNRED) she follows all sectors, as TRACFIN (Intelligence Processing and Action against illegal financial circuits), which observes the flow of funds and possible closures accounts. The different services can communicate with each other through the Hermes cell, but also the national coordinator of intelligence, which includes department heads around it at least once a month so that they take stock of the threat status and display their concern. So there is coordination between the services, which is of an operational aspect of a share in respect Hermès for the Levant theater of operations, the other between the DGSE, DRM and the Special Operations Command ( COS) for monitoring the Sahel terrorists.
This cooperation is in association with the Americans, who provide us with the means of aerial surveillance - including drones - to monitor jihadists become more difficult to trace since they no longer use that rarely means of communication who once would allow us to locate them. Terrorists are back to the old methods - particularly that of the courier - and in telephony, using short-range devices, whose influence is limited to a few kilometers. These new practices greatly complicate the interception of communications, which does not preclude that certain actions are successful. Thus he was able COS neutralize a number of jihadist leaders.
In summary, there is good coordination between the different services, all of which have specific capabilities, depending on the tasks assigned to them.
Daniel boisserie. I want to know how is the cooperation between France and other Western European countries. You mentioned the difficulty of recruiting linguists and interpreters picture. Can you explain what is the role of interpreters images, and what is their training? As for linguists, what are the most popular languages, and those where you have the most difficulty in finding staff? Finally, do not you think that the sharing of personal exercising these functions could be deeper, especially regarding the DGSE?
Édith Gueugneau. DRM is part of the French intelligence system coordinated by the National Intelligence Council (CNR), including the establishment in 2008 enabled a better sharing of knowledge and information in respect of each of liability perimeters. What is your assessment of the creation of RSS? Today, France must adopt effective and modern means, while having strengthened safeguards and high definition of protection of our nation. How do you think the draft law on intelligence can he afford to go further deal with the terrorist threat in hyperconnectée society?
General Christophe Gomart. Cooperation with the countries of Western Europe is good. DRM participating in two forums, one regularly bringing together the NATO countries around various topics. I remember that in one of these forums, we tried to force our hand about Ukraine. This shows the importance of having concrete and factual information: from this point of view, France has the means to assess the situation and make his point of view.
Cooperation is also done in the framework of bilateral relations, that is to say, information exchange. France, usually very good in terms of Africa, is able to provide information on this region to its partners in exchange for other information about areas where she collects less. We share a lot with the Germans, the Americans, the British and Swiss.
An image interpreter is a person able to locate a satellite image of the elements that you and I would not see, whether a missile is erected or not, to highlight the presence of a helicopter on the aft deck of a ship and identify exactly what type of device it is, to distinguish between shell impacts and shrubs, where other only see black spots. The initial basic training lasts at least six months, and there are additional continuous training in order to perform analysis even faster and precise. The exercise of this feature requires a good knowledge of the enemy capabilities to distinguish between military equipment and those that are not, and to be able, for example, to draw conclusions about how certain canons are arranged.
To form a Chinese linguist, it takes three years; Russian or Arabic, two years. So we have a vested interest in retaining the personnel concerned once they are trained, as the length of their training is a significant investment. Of course, we strive to share these features with other intelligence services. If we currently require linguists fluent in Tamasheq - one of the languages spoken in the Sahel - we do not know how long it will be useful to have such specialists, so we think about twice before bring in a personal that language training sector: it is better to use shared personnel. Also, when possible, we try to convert the linguists in a language that no longer has a major advantage for us and some of the many linguists we have trained Serbo-Croatian during the 1990s ont- they were transformed into the Russian specialists linguists. Similarly the crisis in Central Africa she has forced us to find people to talk Sango.
On this point, it seems to me, as leader of my counterparts from other services, which should engage a true reflection on the national level to determine if it would be possible to recruit in France Tamasheq speaking staff, Pashto or Dari - two languages including Afghanistan - in exchange for the issuance of a long-term visa or the allocation of French nationality. One of the obstacles that we face in recruiting is that our service is not necessarily the one offering the best compensation - and I'm not even talking about the positions offered by the private sector.
General Christophe Gomart.
Meeting about intelligence cooperation.
Interesting paragraph. Frédéric Lefebvre. What are our relations with NATO base in Norfolk?
General Christophe Gomart. We have excellent relations with the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) and intelligence notes DRM also supply NATO reflection. In September, General Denis Mercier will succeed General Jean-Paul Paloméros to this post.
The real difficulty with NATO is that US intelligence is dominant, while the French intelligence is more or less considered - hence the importance for us to supply sufficiently commanders of the NATO French origin information. NATO announced that the Russians would invade Ukraine while according to the information of the DRM, nothing came to support this hypothesis - we had indeed found that the Russians had not deployed command or logistics, including field hospitals, to consider a military invasion and the units of second level had made no movement. Subsequently showed that we were right, because if Russian soldiers were actually seen in Ukraine, it was more of a ploy to put pressure on Ukrainian President Poroshenko as an attempted invasion.
Mr Philippe Nauche draftsman. Thank you for letting us share your beliefs about the bill relating to intelligence and your service.
[/spoiler]
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
A kremlin troll calling the west propaganda why I'd never
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
A kremlin troll calling the west propaganda why I'd never
Calling someone a troll because its easier than refuting their argument? Why I'd never...
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
A kremlin troll calling the west propaganda why I'd never
Calling someone a troll because its easier than refuting their argument? Why I'd never...
Walks like a duck quacks like a duck its probably a duck
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
A kremlin troll calling the west propaganda why I'd never
Calling someone a troll because its easier than refuting their argument? Why I'd never...
Walks like a duck quacks like a duck its probably a duck
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
Or the fact that Russian soldiers had uploaded videos/pictures saying as much, and with geotagged coordinates embedded in pictures? (the same way some US soldiers did and managed to allow the Taliban to accurate target aircraft on the ground in Afghanistan before restrictions on use of personal devices were put into force)
The size of such forces may be debatable, and the extent of their capabilities, but there's far too much evidence of such to deny their presence entirely.
I admire Russia and her people in so many ways. America cannot understand how Russia has for over a thousand years stood between Western Europe and the Middle East in a dangerous and volitile place. It is a strong country that has made mistakes like all countries and is culturally different from us in some ways but I applaud her strength and stout defiance of their national interests and their protection and care for those who are loyal to Russia no matter which country they find themselves in currently.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
Or the fact that Russian soldiers had uploaded videos/pictures saying as much, and with geotagged coordinates embedded in pictures? (the same way some US soldiers did and managed to allow the Taliban to accurate target aircraft on the ground in Afghanistan before restrictions on use of personal devices were put into force)
The size of such forces may be debatable, and the extent of their capabilities, but there's far too much evidence of such to deny their presence entirely.
Not to mention an entire squad of Russian paratroopers were captured in Ukraine.
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
First of all, General Gomart is the head of DRM. Which is just one, neither the smallest, nor newest, of France's alphabet soup of Intelligence organizations. However, you're confusing him with the head of DGSE.
As he grouses about later, his agency depends on the US for pretty much everything. DRM has been notoriously undermanned with a total staff of less than two thousand, and a budget of about 150m dollars a year. So, you can see where him saying that they saw no proof might be sensational, but isn't being taken too seriously.
Two, as was pointed out earlier, the story about Russian soldiers saying they had been sent to the Ukraine was actually broken by a Russian media outlet. Not 'the west'. Not 'the Ukrainians'. Russian. They broke the story.
Though, as you said before, they were clearly inventing the story for their own political gain against Putin.
Calling someone a troll because its easier than refuting their argument? Why I'd never...
Hold on one second then, while I pull off a two for one.
[...]
You mistake me.
This is ad hominem.
Ustrello wrote: A kremlin troll calling the west propaganda why I'd never
This is a valid argument.
Vaktathi wrote: Or the fact that Russian soldiers had uploaded videos/pictures saying as much, and with geotagged coordinates embedded in pictures? (the same way some US soldiers did and managed to allow the Taliban to accurate target aircraft on the ground in Afghanistan before restrictions on use of personal devices were put into force)
The size of such forces may be debatable, and the extent of their capabilities, but there's far too much evidence of such to deny their presence entirely.
No, you (and I believe this is not the first time) failed to grasp that I was using your post to set up a humorous opener to mine, slyly mocking Iron_Captain's pro Putin position.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
The evidence is near incontrovertible.
It's understandable you not believing as you're experience is with Russian media controlled by genuine liars.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
Russian media and Western media ultimately aren't the same thing though. Russian media has little to no reason to dig up stuff on their own government, as they're at the mercy of the Kremlin, whereas Western media stands to gain from exposing government missteps. Trying to draw a comparison between the two is dishonest.
That is not to say that Western media as a whole is some sort of spotless paragon of integrity, but it's a damn sight better than the likes of RT.
Tyran wrote: The problem is that western media tends to parrot the Ukrainian media which is at least as unreliable as the Russian one.
Of course the problem with that statement is, as has been pointed out, at least some of the allegations reported by western media have originated with Russian sources.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
Russian media and Western media ultimately aren't the same thing though. Russian media has little to no reason to dig up stuff on their own government, as they're at the mercy of the Kremlin, whereas Western media stands to gain from exposing government missteps. Trying to draw a comparison between the two is dishonest.
That is not to say that Western media as a whole is some sort of spotless paragon of integrity, but it's a damn sight better than the likes of RT.
It depends what media station you look at. RT is funded for by the Russian state, but you seem to think this is the case for every media station in Russia. That is not true. Some Russian media stations controlled by the liberal opposition have plenty of reason to dig up stuff on the government, it is what they do all the time. In fact, spreading anti-government and pro-opposition messages is pretty much the very reason they exist. In the West it is usually not all that different. The largest media stations are run by the state, and there are also private ones whose owners have their own interests. There exists no such thing as independent media, unlike what is often claimed by the West. Media needs huge lots of money to operate, and that leads to all media controlled by either states or oligarchs.
What we've got is a 30+ nations with democratically elected governments representing nearly a billion people, all saying what Russia is doing is wrong. We even have proof of Russia's involvement in Ukraine, we can list names and service numbers of soldiers in active service in Ukraine. There's photographic evidence that Russia fired shells into Ukraine from within Russia. There's even a video taken by a Guardian journalist driving behind Russian APCs driving across the boarder into Ukraine. There's also proof of a BUK was in rebel hands the day MH-17 was shot down.
Then there's Russia's government saying they're the ones telling the truth. A country being run by a man who's been in power for 15 years.
Over that time multiple assassinations of dissidents over the years including one very recently. People who have exposed corrupt government officials being arrested and killed in prison and Illegal seizure of oil companies by the government.
Putin tries to make out that Russia is this grand liberator and that everyone but them are fascists. Saying that they fought fascists in WW2 and ignoring that they allied with them to begin.
He's also an accused paedophile, the accuser was assassinated but it does make you wonder, especially after seeing the picture of him kissing a little boys tummy.
The plain facts are this. A Russian backed leader was ousted, then Russia invaded Crimea, a territory that belongs to Ukraine. Russia they said the local population voted for Russian membership on it so its fine.
At the same time Siberia tries to hold an independence march and it's banned, and they arrest the activists. Putin denied sending troops at the time into Crimea but then admits that he'd actually sent special forces there.
I think it's pretty clear who's more trust worthy than who.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
Russian media and Western media ultimately aren't the same thing though. Russian media has little to no reason to dig up stuff on their own government, as they're at the mercy of the Kremlin, whereas Western media stands to gain from exposing government missteps. Trying to draw a comparison between the two is dishonest.
That is not to say that Western media as a whole is some sort of spotless paragon of integrity, but it's a damn sight better than the likes of RT.
It depends what media station you look at. RT is funded for by the Russian state, but you seem to think this is the case for every media station in Russia. That is not true. Some Russian media stations controlled by the liberal opposition have plenty of reason to dig up stuff on the government, it is what they do all the time.
The difference being that Western media isn't under the threat of having the opinion police shutting the place down.
You'll also note that Western nations aren't, as far as I am aware, blocking access to Russian media sources, whereas there's more and more legislation coming out of the Kremlin designed to clamp down on internet freedom.
Again; trying to equate Western media with Russian media is intellectually dishonest. They're two different beasts.
You mean besides the fact that russian soldiers themselves had said they are/were in ukraine?
Yeah, because Western and Ukrainian media telling you Russian soldiers said that is so much more reliable than the head of the French intelligence service. Seriously, the way in which Westerners tend to believe in their media is really scary. They are media. Lies and propaganda is pretty much their job.
Russian media and Western media ultimately aren't the same thing though. Russian media has little to no reason to dig up stuff on their own government, as they're at the mercy of the Kremlin, whereas Western media stands to gain from exposing government missteps. Trying to draw a comparison between the two is dishonest.
That is not to say that Western media as a whole is some sort of spotless paragon of integrity, but it's a damn sight better than the likes of RT.
It depends what media station you look at. RT is funded for by the Russian state, but you seem to think this is the case for every media station in Russia. That is not true. Some Russian media stations controlled by the liberal opposition have plenty of reason to dig up stuff on the government, it is what they do all the time. In fact, spreading anti-government and pro-opposition messages is pretty much the very reason they exist.
In the West it is usually not all that different. The largest media stations are run by the state, and there are also private ones whose owners have their own interests. There exists no such thing as independent media, unlike what is often claimed by the West. Media needs huge lots of money to operate, and that leads to all media controlled by either states or oligarchs.
Russian government has control over what they put out and the infrastructure they use. They can and do pull the plug when they don't like what they see.
Western press isn't controlled by the government, its not allowed, There's plenty of independent press who would have no reason to lie about what's happening in situations like this. The BBC for example is one of the most independent news sources there us, and gets it money from the people not from the government. It's charter is setup to prevent state interference.
Comparing a free western press to what is allowed in Russia is stupid. Off message Russian Journalists have a worryingly high mortality rate.
The news websites that have been critical of Crimeas annexation are shut down. They're now only contactable from outside of Russia.
If independent Russian journalists are so free why are so many of them leaving the country?
Western press isn't controlled by the government, its not allowed, There's plenty of independent press who would have no reason to lie about what's happening in situations like this. The BBC for example is one of the most independent news sources there us, and gets it money from the people not from the government. It's charter is setup to prevent state interference.
Comparing a free western press to what is allowed in Russia is stupid. Off message Russian Journalists have a worryingly high mortality rate.
.....
Just want to address this fallacy.
Western media is completely controlled by the government/ruling class...
Western media cannot operate unless they have the proper governmental permits(In the US it is the FCC and Britain
rolls governmental bureaucracy and corporate corruption in to one package with the BBC.)
Also, the US is a corporate oligarchy, in essence the corporation that owns the media outlet is controlled by the same people that control our elections and our government. (Read about the debate corporation).
As to going off script. Western journalists are so tightly monitored/controlled that they are not allowed to go "off script". Between pre-recorded broadcasts and the mandatory censorship delay on live broadcasts(Janet Jackson nip slip) such doesn't happen unless the government wants us to see it for some reason.
The difference between western media and Russian(and China anyone) media is that while some Russian opposition reporters may die under mysterious causes, all western reporters who go off script just disappear. Not as in dead as in they go away, are replaced by another corporate mouthpiece and never work in the business again.
As someone else has said, there is no such thing as an independent "free" media these days....... unless one counts independent internet blogs.
Western press isn't controlled by the government, its not allowed, There's plenty of independent press who would have no reason to lie about what's happening in situations like this. The BBC for example is one of the most independent news sources there us, and gets it money from the people not from the government. It's charter is setup to prevent state interference.
Comparing a free western press to what is allowed in Russia is stupid. Off message Russian Journalists have a worryingly high mortality rate.
.....
Just want to address this fallacy.
Western media is completely controlled by the government/ruling class...
Western media cannot operate unless they have the proper governmental permits(In the US it is the FCC and Britain
rolls governmental bureaucracy and corporate corruption in to one package with the BBC.)
Also, the US is a corporate oligarchy, in essence the corporation that owns the media outlet is controlled by the same people that control our elections and our government. (Read about the debate corporation).
As to going off script. Western journalists are so tightly monitored/controlled that they are not allowed to go "off script". Between pre-recorded broadcasts and the mandatory censorship delay on live broadcasts(Janet Jackson nip slip) such doesn't happen unless the government wants us to see it for some reason.
The difference between western media and Russian(and China anyone) media is that while some Russian opposition reporters may die under mysterious causes, all western reporters who go off script just disappear. Not as in dead as in they go away, are replaced by another corporate mouthpiece and never work in the business again.
As someone else has said, there is no such thing as an independent "free" media these days....... unless one counts independent internet blogs.
Western press isn't controlled by the government, its not allowed, There's plenty of independent press who would have no reason to lie about what's happening in situations like this. The BBC for example is one of the most independent news sources there us, and gets it money from the people not from the government. It's charter is setup to prevent state interference.
Comparing a free western press to what is allowed in Russia is stupid. Off message Russian Journalists have a worryingly high mortality rate. .....
Just want to address this fallacy.
Western media is completely controlled by the government/ruling class...
Western media cannot operate unless they have the proper governmental permits(In the US it is the FCC and Britain rolls governmental bureaucracy and corporate corruption in to one package with the BBC.)
Also, the US is a corporate oligarchy, in essence the corporation that owns the media outlet is controlled by the same people that control our elections and our government. (Read about the debate corporation).
As to going off script. Western journalists are so tightly monitored/controlled that they are not allowed to go "off script". Between pre-recorded broadcasts and the mandatory censorship delay on live broadcasts(Janet Jackson nip slip) such doesn't happen unless the government wants us to see it for some reason.
The difference between western media and Russian(and China anyone) media is that while some Russian opposition reporters may die under mysterious causes, all western reporters who go off script just disappear. Not as in dead as in they go away, are replaced by another corporate mouthpiece and never work in the business again.
As someone else has said, there is no such thing as an independent "free" media these days....... unless one counts independent internet blogs.
I think you are getting a little tinfoily there, no offence meant. Western media is biased, but it's not that bad.
FCC does not grant permits. print media, or stuff on the internet. It does not really have anything to do with the content either, it's mostly there to make it so signals (be they radio, television, ect) don't get mixed up.
The US is not an oligarchy. It is still a democratic republic. That has not changed. It sometimes seem that way, but politicians are still elected by the people.
News organisations are coperations (it's how they make money), but it's not like they are not allowed to show stories some shadowy corpeation doesn't want them to. They simply print the stories that make them the most money. This sometimes means important, but boring, stories being pushed to page 14, but that's never going to change, ever, and has always been that way.
And what censorship we have is decency censorship, not story censorship. You can't show sex on daytime TV, but you can talk about any new story. And most broadcasts are live.
The reason why is because I don't favour either side in this. My comments are a sharp criticism of the media propaganda machines worldwide.
Since the first War of the Worlds broadcast governments and those who seek to control have had concrete proof of electronic media's ability to fool the masses.
Print medias propaganda abilities were proven in the American Revolutionary war.
Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think you are getting a little tinfoily there, no offence meant. Western media is biased, but it's not that bad.
FCC does not grant permits. print media, or stuff on the internet. It does not really have anything to do with the content either, it's mostly there to make it so signals (be they radio, television, ect) don't get mixed up.
The US is not an oligarchy. It is still a democratic republic. That has not changed. It sometimes seem that way, but politicians are still elected by the people.
News organisations are coperations (it's how they make money), but it's not like they are not allowed to show stories some shadowy corpeation doesn't want them to. They simply print the stories that make them the most money. This sometimes means important, but boring, stories being pushed to page 14, but that's never going to change, ever, and has always been that way.
And what censorship we have is decency censorship, not story censorship. You can't show sex on daytime TV, but you can talk about any new story. And most broadcasts are live.
Ah yes, the sideways conspiracy crackpot accusation followed by a lot misleading and inaccurate statements.
1)The FCC grants broadcast licences. In order to secure such a license a company has to apply for such and in that application the petitioners/applicants must promise and give evidence of how they will operate in the public's best interest.
This last line is important due to its vagueness and how it has been applied in recent times.
Once an applicant passes review and pays the fees they are given a license to broadcast in a specific bandwidth.
2)The US is "not" a democratic republic. It is an Oligarchy...and I am not alone in this opinion....some guys over at Princeton accumulated the raw data, crunched the numbers and came up with solid evidence that the US is now an oligarchy.
3)No, the 6 news outlets in the US do not just print/broadcast the stories. The massage, trim, fluff and edit to "create" the news. The kind of honest media ended with Kronkite....if not before.
News stories are selected by what is most profitable while disturbing the general public the least. Their job is to keep us scared and occasionally a little outraged about all the minutia tha doesn't really matter.
4) We have content censorship all of the time. We also have out right deception at times. It is frightening the number of times that important national level stories were confined to their local markets. (I was in Pittsburgh during the 2009 G20 IMF summit ..............self edited......... )
Saw where you believe that most broadcasts are live and realized that such information would be wasted.
5) The fact that you think that most media broadcasts (News coverage?) are live is very ..., shall we say innocent. Live weather alerts are real-time but very little else is.
I think you are getting a little tinfoily there, no offence meant. Western media is biased, but it's not that bad.
FCC does not grant permits. print media, or stuff on the internet. It does not really have anything to do with the content either, it's mostly there to make it so signals (be they radio, television, ect) don't get mixed up.
The US is not an oligarchy. It is still a democratic republic. That has not changed. It sometimes seem that way, but politicians are still elected by the people.
News organisations are coperations (it's how they make money), but it's not like they are not allowed to show stories some shadowy corpeation doesn't want them to. They simply print the stories that make them the most money. This sometimes means important, but boring, stories being pushed to page 14, but that's never going to change, ever, and has always been that way.
And what censorship we have is decency censorship, not story censorship. You can't show sex on daytime TV, but you can talk about any new story. And most broadcasts are live.
Ah yes, the sideways conspiracy crackpot accusation followed by a lot misleading and inaccurate statements.
1)The FCC grants broadcast licences. In order to secure such a license a company has to apply for such and in that application the petitioners/applicants must promise and give evidence of how they will operate in the public's best interest.
This last line is important due to its vagueness and how it has been applied in recent times.
Once an applicant passes review and pays the fees they are given a license to broadcast in a specific bandwidth.
2)The US is "not" a democratic republic. It is an Oligarchy...and I am not alone in this opinion....some guys over at Princeton accumulated the raw data, crunched the numbers and came up with solid evidence that the US is now an oligarchy.
3)No, the 6 news outlets in the US do not just print/broadcast the stories. The massage, trim, fluff and edit to "create" the news. The kind of honest media ended with Kronkite....if not before.
News stories are selected by what is most profitable while disturbing the general public the least. Their job is to keep us scared and occasionally a little outraged about all the minutia tha doesn't really matter.
4) We have content censorship all of the time. We also have out right deception at times. It is frightening the number of times that important national level stories were confined to their local markets. (I was in Pittsburgh during the 2009 G20 IMF summit ..............self edited......... )
Saw where you believe that most broadcasts are live and realized that such information would be wasted.
5) The fact that you think that most media broadcasts (News coverage?) are live is very ..., shall we say innocent. Live weather alerts are real-time but very little else is.
1) Still doesn't explain print and web based new then? And also doesn't explain why the FCC doesn't continually deny requests form groups the current governmetn would rather not make noise (here's a hint, it's because they aren't allowed).
2) And I've read articles about that stuff, and disagree. If we the people actually all want something, you know what we do? We elect people who also want those things and get them to get laws passed. Yes the wealthy and corporations have more political power than your average joe. I don't like that, but as long as our election laws remain so lax it's going to be that way, and half of the country's politicians seem to love it being that way, so it's going to take a big effort to change (especially as we would then need to either pass a new constitutional amendment, or a new supreme court). Still doesn't make us an oligarchy.
3) Yes, that's what I said in more words. They report what sells, so important, but boring, stories get put to the wayside, and they create hype to keep viewership up. They are buisnesses, and thus care about one thing, money.
4) Care for some examples and proof?
And I'm not sure what your doing with your little editing thing. I can edit my writings to say ***REDACTED BY THE CIA*** and it doesn't mean gak.
5) How do you then explain call-ins and live news coverage. Unless it's the media that stages every mass shooting, bombing attempt, and hostage situation?
obsidianaura wrote:The UK government has no control over the BBC, not since the second world war. It is completely seperate and fully independent.
There's even an independent watchdog separate to BBC and goverment to insure this.
People pay for their TV licence and that goes to the BBC they get no money from the state.
It is not state funded, it is publicly funded.
The only thing the goverment can do is trying to change the amount the BBC charge for the licence fee.
You are right in some areas and wrong in others....but I must first apologize for my inaccurate description of the British media system as it now stands.
You guys version of the FCC is Offcom. That wasn't around when I was over there. Still it does the same thing as the FCC in providing conditional licenses to broadcast and overseeing that certain conditions are met...including censoring.
Upon perusal of you guys current regulatory codes, it doesn't seem like much has changed apart from modernization and name changes(restructuring) of the regulatory offices.
I remember the censoring of the "Troubles in Ireland" and my hippie uncle used to tell me about the BBC's attempt to censor rock and roll music.
True, you guys have a guaranteed right to free expression....just so long as it doesn't conflict with anything in the long list for causd to censor.
Still, you guys are better than the US in that the every 20 some odd year regulatory office name change/shake up does help to curb institutionalized corruption.
Co'tor Shas wrote:
1) Still doesn't explain print and web based new then? And also doesn't explain why the FCC doesn't continually deny requests form groups the current governmetn would rather not make noise (here's a hint, it's because they aren't allowed).
2) And I've read articles about that stuff, and disagree. If we the people actually all want something, you know what we do? We elect people who also want those things and get them to get laws passed. Yes the wealthy and corporations have more political power than your average joe. I don't like that, but as long as our election laws remain so lax it's going to be that way, and half of the country's politicians seem to love it being that way, so it's going to take a big effort to change (especially as we would then need to either pass a new constitutional amendment, or a new supreme court). Still doesn't make us an oligarchy.
3) Yes, that's what I said in more words. They report what sells, so important, but boring, stories get put to the wayside, and they create hype to keep viewership up. They are buisnesses, and thus care about one thing, money.
4) Care for some examples and proof?
And I'm not sure what your doing with your little editing thing. I can edit my writings to say ***REDACTED BY THE CIA*** and it doesn't mean gak.
5) How do you then explain call-ins and live news coverage. Unless it's the media that stages every mass shooting, bombing attempt, and hostage situation?
1)Print media, for the most part, is owned by the broadcast media corporations and as such write in lockstep with the corporate broadcasts..
The web??? Considered as an unreliable news source unless you are citing the major media outlets online feeds.(Not saying that this is the way things should be, just that is how they currently are.)
You see, before the interwebs there were the AP and UPI. After the internet the AP got bigger and bigger and is part of the reason why every news outlet regurgitates the same story.
Yeah, the FCC doesn't deny requests from small independent opposition groups. Instead they assemble and offer up wavelength packages that are so huge only large corporations can afford to buy in.
They also sometimes sit on wavelengths by not accepting applications until there is enough spectrum available to create those large wavelength packages.
2) The Commission on Presidential Debates says otherwise. It is a tool of the Oligarchy to prevent third party and opposition candidates from getting national exposure.
The problem is that we have a two party system in which both party's are controlled by the elites. Both parties receive massive donations from the same elite few. This in effect makes the US a one party country.
I view our current political system as to being like the NFL. You have the NFC and the AFC, the little people will root and cheer for whatever they trot out as the home team but in the end the final scores mean nothing. The NFL has made its money and will continue to do what ever it wants to the game, the teams and the fans.
3) Read closer, We said similar things with differing perspectives and conclusions.
4)Ok, 2009 G20 summit in Pittsburgh. Massive riots covered pretty much by only local news outlets. Was traveling at the time and was astounded at the absolute dearth of national coverage. Called up a couple of the major news outlets to ask why. ...The answer, they were pulling a BBC "Troubles in Ireland" media blackout under the excuse that they were afraid of triggering sympathy riots.
Another disturbing thing was how little social media buzz there was compared to how many people were there and the amount of force that the police used. They acutual broke out an LLRAD and used it on the protesters.
5) Callins are a non-occurance in our local tv market and live news coverage is an exception to the normal coverage.
Again, much of the news is recorded earlier with things like weather and traffic being real-time. Some sections of the news are recorded a few minutes prior or on a timed delay..others are recorded hours before. And that is your local news. National news is pretty much all pre-recorded.
Yes, exceptions exist in breaking news emergencies. Even then, many of these type of broadcasts are on a timed delay.
Remember, you are the one that said most were live. I am arguing that most is prerecorded or time delayed with some exceptions.
Anythings not recorded is going to have a timed delay. Even things that aren't mandated (such a web-based) often do, to allow the creator to censor stuff like swearing or extreme violence.
Other than that, our differences seem to be opinion based.
obsidianaura wrote:The UK government has no control over the BBC, not since the second world war. It is completely seperate and fully independent.
There's even an independent watchdog separate to BBC and goverment to insure this.
People pay for their TV licence and that goes to the BBC they get no money from the state.
It is not state funded, it is publicly funded.
The only thing the goverment can do is trying to change the amount the BBC charge for the licence fee.
You are right in some areas and wrong in others....but I must first apologize for my inaccurate description of the British media system as it now stands.
You guys version of the FCC is Offcom. That wasn't around when I was over there. Still it does the same thing as the FCC in providing conditional licenses to broadcast and overseeing that certain conditions are met...including censoring.
Upon perusal of you guys current regulatory codes, it doesn't seem like much has changed apart from modernization and name changes(restructuring) of the regulatory offices.
I remember the censoring of the "Troubles in Ireland" and my hippie uncle used to tell me about the BBC's attempt to censor rock and roll music.
True, you guys have a guaranteed right to free expression....just so long as it doesn't conflict with anything in the long list for causd to censor.
Still, you guys are better than the US in that the every 20 some odd year regulatory office name change/shake up does help to curb institutionalized corruption.
Ofcom is independent of the government, the government can close them down or restrict their powers but they cant tell Ofcom what to do in terms of censoring.
Ofcom does useful things like fine advertisers when they make false claims they also investigate complaints by the public, and not just of Britain but other countires too. They can't interfere with the news unless it is not reported with "due accuracy and presented with impartiality."
From what I've seen, the FCC is not the same as Ofcom, the government can and does influence the FCC and it is overseen by Congress. Not sure but didn't Obama appoint someone to the FCC who worked for Comcast to be in charge of regulating the internet network, then you had all the net neutrality issues?
Western press isn't controlled by the government, its not allowed, There's plenty of independent press who would have no reason to lie about what's happening in situations like this. The BBC for example is one of the most independent news sources there us, and gets it money from the people not from the government. It's charter is setup to prevent state interference.
Comparing a free western press to what is allowed in Russia is stupid. Off message Russian Journalists have a worryingly high mortality rate.
.....
Just want to address this fallacy.
Western media is completely controlled by the government/ruling class...
Western media cannot operate unless they have the proper governmental permits(In the US it is the FCC and Britain
rolls governmental bureaucracy and corporate corruption in to one package with the BBC.)
Also, the US is a corporate oligarchy, in essence the corporation that owns the media outlet is controlled by the same people that control our elections and our government. (Read about the debate corporation).
As to going off script. Western journalists are so tightly monitored/controlled that they are not allowed to go "off script". Between pre-recorded broadcasts and the mandatory censorship delay on live broadcasts(Janet Jackson nip slip) such doesn't happen unless the government wants us to see it for some reason.
The difference between western media and Russian(and China anyone) media is that while some Russian opposition reporters may die under mysterious causes, all western reporters who go off script just disappear. Not as in dead as in they go away, are replaced by another corporate mouthpiece and never work in the business again.
As someone else has said, there is no such thing as an independent "free" media these days....... unless one counts independent internet blogs.
Whataboutism accusation incoming!
How would this be whataboutism? It's a comparison between Western and Russian media, which is what we're discussing.
I totally agree with captain avatar. on all points. Western media and Russian media all lie. America is no longer a democracy, and hasn.t been for some time.
How many western media sources, have commented on Ukrainian politicians dying????.
Ukrainian MP and active anti-Maidan activist, Oleg Kalashnikov, has been killed in his flat in Kiev. His killing is the latest in a series of odd deaths plaguing former government officials and ex-President Yanukovich’s party members.
The 52-year-old was found dead at his residence in Kiev on Wednesday evening. His death was “caused by a gunshot,” the Interior Ministry said in a statement announcing a police inquiry. Ukraine’s criminal investigation chief Vasily Paskal, took the investigation under personal control and promised to share motives and the preliminary results of the probe with reporters as soon as they become available.
On January 29, former chairman of Kharkov region government, Aleksey Kolesnik, was found hanged.
On February 24, former Party of Regions member Stanislav Melnik died of a gunshot with his death treated as suicide.
On February 25, several hours before his trial, the Mayor of Melitopol Sergey Valter was found hanged leaving no suicide note.
The next day, February 26, deputy chief of Melitopol police, Aleksandr Bordyuga, who reportedly acted as Valter’s lawyer, was found dead in his garage.
On February 26, a former MP and ex-chairman of Zaporozhye Regional State Administration was found dead with a gun wound to his neck. His death is being investigated as a suicide.
On February 28, former member of the Party of Regions, Mikhail Chechetov, jumped from the window of his 17th floor apartment in Kiev, leaving a suicide note.
On March 14, a 32-year-old prosecutor Sergey Melnichuk fell from a window of a 9th floor apartment in Odessa.
loki old fart wrote: I totally agree with captain avatar. on all points. Western media and Russian media all lie. America is no longer a democracy, and hasn.t been for some time.
How many western media sources, have commented on Ukrainian politicians dying????.
Spoiler:
Ukrainian MP and active anti-Maidan activist, Oleg Kalashnikov, has been killed in his flat in Kiev. His killing is the latest in a series of odd deaths plaguing former government officials and ex-President Yanukovich’s party members.
The 52-year-old was found dead at his residence in Kiev on Wednesday evening. His death was “caused by a gunshot,” the Interior Ministry said in a statement announcing a police inquiry. Ukraine’s criminal investigation chief Vasily Paskal, took the investigation under personal control and promised to share motives and the preliminary results of the probe with reporters as soon as they become available.
On January 29, former chairman of Kharkov region government, Aleksey Kolesnik, was found hanged.
On February 24, former Party of Regions member Stanislav Melnik died of a gunshot with his death treated as suicide.
On February 25, several hours before his trial, the Mayor of Melitopol Sergey Valter was found hanged leaving no suicide note.
The next day, February 26, deputy chief of Melitopol police, Aleksandr Bordyuga, who reportedly acted as Valter’s lawyer, was found dead in his garage.
On February 26, a former MP and ex-chairman of Zaporozhye Regional State Administration was found dead with a gun wound to his neck. His death is being investigated as a suicide.
On February 28, former member of the Party of Regions, Mikhail Chechetov, jumped from the window of his 17th floor apartment in Kiev, leaving a suicide note.
On March 14, a 32-year-old prosecutor Sergey Melnichuk fell from a window of a 9th floor apartment in Odessa.
Clearly someone reported it, unless you are the Man on Site and are breaking the news here on Dakka.
I know I've read about shaping operations in Odessa and other parts of the Ukraine.
loki old fart wrote: I totally agree with captain avatar. on all points. Western media and Russian media all lie. America is no longer a democracy, and hasn.t been for some time. How many western media sources, have commented on Ukrainian politicians dying????.
Ukrainian MP and active anti-Maidan activist, Oleg Kalashnikov, has been killed in his flat in Kiev. His killing is the latest in a series of odd deaths plaguing former government officials and ex-President Yanukovich’s party members.
The 52-year-old was found dead at his residence in Kiev on Wednesday evening. His death was “caused by a gunshot,” the Interior Ministry said in a statement announcing a police inquiry. Ukraine’s criminal investigation chief Vasily Paskal, took the investigation under personal control and promised to share motives and the preliminary results of the probe with reporters as soon as they become available.
On January 29, former chairman of Kharkov region government, Aleksey Kolesnik, was found hanged.
On February 24, former Party of Regions member Stanislav Melnik died of a gunshot with his death treated as suicide.
On February 25, several hours before his trial, the Mayor of Melitopol Sergey Valter was found hanged leaving no suicide note.
The next day, February 26, deputy chief of Melitopol police, Aleksandr Bordyuga, who reportedly acted as Valter’s lawyer, was found dead in his garage.
On February 26, a former MP and ex-chairman of Zaporozhye Regional State Administration was found dead with a gun wound to his neck. His death is being investigated as a suicide.
On February 28, former member of the Party of Regions, Mikhail Chechetov, jumped from the window of his 17th floor apartment in Kiev, leaving a suicide note.
On March 14, a 32-year-old prosecutor Sergey Melnichuk fell from a window of a 9th floor apartment in Odessa.
And do you have any actual proof of foul play in any of those deaths, or are you just spreading more misinformation as usual?
Its pretty funny that when you google those news, all you get is known puttinbot sites...
loki old fart wrote: I totally agree with captain avatar. on all points. Western media and Russian media all lie. America is no longer a democracy, and hasn.t been for some time.
How many western media sources, have commented on Ukrainian politicians dying????.
Ukrainian MP and active anti-Maidan activist, Oleg Kalashnikov, has been killed in his flat in Kiev. His killing is the latest in a series of odd deaths plaguing former government officials and ex-President Yanukovich’s party members.
The 52-year-old was found dead at his residence in Kiev on Wednesday evening. His death was “caused by a gunshot,” the Interior Ministry said in a statement announcing a police inquiry. Ukraine’s criminal investigation chief Vasily Paskal, took the investigation under personal control and promised to share motives and the preliminary results of the probe with reporters as soon as they become available.
On January 29, former chairman of Kharkov region government, Aleksey Kolesnik, was found hanged.
On February 24, former Party of Regions member Stanislav Melnik died of a gunshot with his death treated as suicide.
On February 25, several hours before his trial, the Mayor of Melitopol Sergey Valter was found hanged leaving no suicide note.
The next day, February 26, deputy chief of Melitopol police, Aleksandr Bordyuga, who reportedly acted as Valter’s lawyer, was found dead in his garage.
On February 26, a former MP and ex-chairman of Zaporozhye Regional State Administration was found dead with a gun wound to his neck. His death is being investigated as a suicide.
On February 28, former member of the Party of Regions, Mikhail Chechetov, jumped from the window of his 17th floor apartment in Kiev, leaving a suicide note.
On March 14, a 32-year-old prosecutor Sergey Melnichuk fell from a window of a 9th floor apartment in Odessa.
And do you have any actual proof of foul play in any of those deaths, or are you just spreading more misinformation as usual?
Its pretty funny that when you google those news, all you get is known puttinbot sites...
A Ukrainian journalist known for his pro-Russian views has been shot dead in the capital Kiev.
Oles Buzyna, 45, was killed by shots fired from a car, Interior Ministry adviser Anton Herashchenko said.
Mr Buzyna is the latest in a series of allies of Ukraine's pro-Russian former President, Victor Yanukovych, to die in suspicious circumstances.
His killing comes a day after MP Oleg Kalashnikov, who was close to Mr Yanukovych, was shot dead in Kiev.
Mr Herashchenko said he believed both killings were related to the victims' involvement with Ukraine's "anti-Maidan" movement, which opposed the popular overthrow of Mr Yanukovych in 2014.
According to Mr Herashchenko, both men were key witnesses in a criminal case related to pro-Russian activists who attacked protesters in the Maidan Square uprising that deposed Mr Yanukovych.
Mr Buzyna, who was an active blogger and briefly editor of pro-Russian daily newspaper Segodnya, was killed outside his home.
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has ordered an investigation into the murders, calling them "deliberate" acts that play "into the hands of our enemies".
At least eight other officials connected to Mr Yanukovych's government have died suddenly in the past three months.
Authorities initially labelled some of the deaths suicides, but later they said it was possible that some of the people were killed or forced to take their lives.
Asked on a call-in programme about the shooting of Mr Buzyna, Russian President Vladimir Putin said: "This is not the first assassination. There is a whole series of such killings in Ukraine."
@phantomViper BBC good enough for ya. And thanks for proving my point when you posted ", all you get is known puttinbot sites... "
All I found in western media was 1 small mention in a side story
Shoot yourself in the foot much, do you ?
AlmightyWalrus wrote: So what you're saying is that the BBC did report something about pro-Russians dying? How is that helping your argument at all?
He looked and only found Russian media covering it, although it's being going on for a while.
I found 1 mention as a side note, on a piece about a journalist been killed. And that only after RT made it public.
Point to me I think.
Moving the goalposts a bit, no?
Not really. He wasn't able to find a link on western media, which was my point.
The BBC only posted their link later. After I had already posted on here.
Mr Zotov's English is near perfect - polished at international conventions of the table top fantasy war game, War Hammer, through interaction with other fans.
So your parents were right : Nothing good will come of all this toy soldier nonsense !
@phantomViper BBC good enough for ya. And thanks for proving my point when you posted ", all you get is known puttinbot sites... "
All I found in western media was 1 small mention in a side story
Shoot yourself in the foot much, do you ?
Goalpost moving much?
You have yet to provide any evidence to any of your claims of wrong doings in any of the other deaths, this one was obviously a murder so it was reported in the international media (and its missing from your original list), all of the others are just propagandist conjectures and as such are only reported in propagandist sites.
You really should change your MO, after reds8n article its become more than clear that you are just following a pre-set playbook.
You have yet to provide any evidence to any of your claims of wrong doings in any of the other deaths, this one was obviously a murder so it was reported in the international media (and its missing from your original list), all of the others are just propagandist conjectures and as such are only reported in propagandist sites.
To quote from another poster in this thread, If it walls like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.
after reds8n article its become more than clear that you are just following a pre-set playbook.
What's so special about redskins link?.
A load of kids, joining the army cadets. Keeping them off the streets and out of trouble.
And old ladies collecting clothes and food for people in need. We have them over here.
Army and air force cadets. Less than a mile from me.
Navy and royal marine cadets, in the next town, I was a marine cadet there myself.
I'm sorry if any of that offends you. I'll tell the red cross and salvation army to stop collecting clothes ETC.
And I'll go to the TA center and stop them as well. Because they're upsetting you.
OH and we have biker gangs as well, as do the Americans. Sorry can't do much about that.
Mr Zotov's English is near perfect - polished at international conventions of the table top fantasy war game, War Hammer, through interaction with other fans.
So your parents were right : Nothing good will come of all this toy soldier nonsense !
Guy takes a bullet in trials - State Secret. Guy is hit by a truck when crossing the road on leave - State Secret...
Aye the regular forums that I check out on this subject have been becoming quieter of late. The Russians have what bits of the country they want so have been winding down their involvement and just letting the separatists do their thing (still supplying arms and gear that is, but the number of troops in the region has been going down).
The media's moved onto some other story, probably some royal birthday party or something. Wars drag on and in the case where people aren't even calling it a proper war, and talk in double speak the whole time, that makes reporting the matter a little taboo. Whatever happened to that counter-Russian propaganda initiative the West was coming up with?
Wyrmalla wrote: Guy takes a bullet in trials - State Secret. Guy is hit by a truck when crossing the road on leave - State Secret...
Aye the regular forums that I check out on this subject have been becoming quieter of late. The Russians have what bits of the country they want so have been winding down their involvement and just letting the separatists do their thing (still supplying arms and gear that is, but the number of troops in the region has been going down).
The media's moved onto some other story, probably some royal birthday party or something. Wars drag on and in the case where people aren't even calling it a proper war, and talk in double speak the whole time, that makes reporting the matter a little taboo. Whatever happened to that counter-Russian propaganda initiative the West was coming up with?
As for Russia: I've been in a heated argument with a friend of mine, of whom is a photographer in Russia. It appears that a sizeable portion of Russian citizens are unaware of or refuse to acknowledge their government's involvement in Ukraine. The guy I talked to even when so far as to say America wants to bait the Russian Federation into a war over Ukraine so the US can invade Russia and take their resources? I'm not sure if he's a crackpot or if this is something that's been propagated by their media. When I pointed out that the US has no interest in hard-to-access siberian crude and in fact the Ruskies were eying Kazakhstan for THEIR available resources, he just laughed.
Beyond that, anything related to Russian involvement in Ukraine is rejected out of hand despite numerous first hand accounts, pictures, satellite photos, rebel testimonies, etc.
I'd really like to hear Iron Captain's input on this, this is quite crazy. Then again, I'm not surprised -- it's like the Iron Curtain all over again.
You can live in a fantasy world and not even know it it would seem, or at least you can be willfully ignorant that there's any other reality but your own.
Aye though, if things go this way then who's expecting Russians to come out some post Putin haze in the next couple of decades like they did with Communism? To find out that the rest of the world's not quite as they were told and well ...that isn't OK. Que North Korea situation in 5, 4, 3... Seriously I can just see the anti-West parades in Red Square now.
Considering the United States can see to it's domestic needs and still export oil at this point... yeah no, I don't think we're secretly after Siberia. The PRC on the other hand might decide to go after it again, but they're playing buddy-buddy right now as they ramp up gamesmanship against the U.S. in the Pacific. Russia being around is convenient for them at the moment.
China is really the power that Russians should be worried about far more than the US. The myth of the West lusting over Siberian resources is just that, a myth. Too many logistical issues, US oil & gas production is booming, and we can get most of the other resources from 3rd world nations. China however, shares a very long border, has much easier potential force projection, has a much more direct need of such resources, and is basically playing Loan Shark to the Russian Federation currently
I mean, if the US is going to lust after resources Russia claims, it's going to be in the arctic, not Siberia.
So, ah, the plot of the sci-fi novel Germline then?
The US, Russia and a few other countries go up against China after the Chinese make their moves on the Russian oil fields. The US and Russia of course both hating each other as they saw one another as natural enemies beforehand, as did their people with all the propaganda, till the real enemy came in the back door. Maybe letting the Chinese take over the Pacific whilst the rest of the world fought a Cold War against each other probably wasn't the best idea. Oh well, after China's glassed the US and Russia go have a real war with each other over the resources of Kazakhstan and the other countries in that region, as China showing its hand pushes the rest of the world to want the exact same thing (the plot of that particular book, not so much the rest of the series, centering over the militarizing of the resource mining industry).
...I'd note that that series was written by a Whitehouse military analyst IIRC. Though it is a sci-fi series, the commentary on "what-if" situations is pretty good actually.
BlaxicanX wrote: Presumably, because the topic just isn't that interesting anymore.
Call us when there's a real war going on.
That is quite offensive you know? People are dying over there every day still. Just this morning there was an attack on Shirokino:
Just a few days ago, 20 people died when Donetsk was shelled again:
Just because Western attention has moved on to new interests doesn't mean the war suddenly stopped.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Airman wrote: As for Russia: I've been in a heated argument with a friend of mine, of whom is a photographer in Russia. It appears that a sizeable portion of Russian citizens are unaware of or refuse to acknowledge their government's involvement in Ukraine. The guy I talked to even when so far as to say America wants to bait the Russian Federation into a war over Ukraine so the US can invade Russia and take their resources? I'm not sure if he's a crackpot or if this is something that's been propagated by their media. When I pointed out that the US has no interest in hard-to-access siberian crude and in fact the Ruskies were eying Kazakhstan for THEIR available resources, he just laughed.
Beyond that, anything related to Russian involvement in Ukraine is rejected out of hand despite numerous first hand accounts, pictures, satellite photos, rebel testimonies, etc.
I'd really like to hear Iron Captain's input on this, this is quite crazy. Then again, I'm not surprised -- it's like the Iron Curtain all over again.
But Russia is not involved at all in Ukraine, at least not officially. Certainly Russia has sent advisors and special forces to secretly help out the rebels, but the idea that Russia has entire divisions fighting in Ukraine is really ridiculous.
The idea that the US wants to destroy Russia is one that you will find is held by most Russians. I blame it on almost a century of communist ideology, where in Soviet propaganda 'capitalist' came to equal 'USA'. But when you think about it, the idea that the West wants to destroy Russia is actually already hundreds of years old, originating with the Great Schism. Russia and the West have a very complicated relationship, I reccommend this book if you want to know more about it: http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/international-relations-and-international-organisations/russia-and-west-alexander-putin-honor-international-relations The US also does not help this by being probably the most russophobic place on earth short of of Lvov and its incredibly agressive foreign policy, regime change operations, invasions and its continuing encirclement of Russia. For all that claiming that you guys don't want to attack Russia, you are damn well making it look so.
Spoiler:
Now it the US were to stop acting like the American Empire, maybe then their message of peace would be taken more seriously by the Russians. Only when the US stops threatening Russia and infringing on its traditional territory can there be a change for better relations.
That aside, Russia wants to take over Kazakhstan for its resources as much as the US wants to take Siberia. Russia has an abundance of resources already, and most of Kazakhstan is just steppe and desert. It does have resources, but no infrastructure to make use of it. Also, Kazakhstan and Russia have very good relations, so it is unlikely they will ever go to war. Especially because Kazakhstan is dependent on Russia for a lot of things.
Vaktathi wrote: China is really the power that Russians should be worried about far more than the US. The myth of the West lusting over Siberian resources is just that, a myth. Too many logistical issues, US oil & gas production is booming, and we can get most of the other resources from 3rd world nations. China however, shares a very long border, has much easier potential force projection, has a much more direct need of such resources, and is basically playing Loan Shark to the Russian Federation currently
I mean, if the US is going to lust after resources Russia claims, it's going to be in the arctic, not Siberia.
Russia's relation with China is also pretty complicated. One one side, China really wants an alliance and cooperation with Russia so they can get access to Siberian resources and Russia wants to ally with China to have the power to stand up to the West. This has resulted in the SCO. On the other side however, is the fact that China has become much more economically powerful than Russia since the '90s. Therefore, in any alliance Russia will actually be the junior partner to China. This is of course utterly unacceptable to Russia, an insult to Russian honour and imperial tradition. Therefore Putin has been pretty reluctant in going ahead with alliances like the SCO. It is a difficult dilemma. On one hand is an alliance with China neccessary if Russia wants to maintain its great power status, but on the other hand would an alliance with China actually diminish this great power status. In any case, China is no military threat to Russia, there is no need for China to be agressive towards Russia. Why would it go through an incredibly destructive war to obtain resources that it could also obtain by economic infiltration and other peaceful means much more profitable than war?
I would suggest the reason the Chinese aren't being aggressive is because the Russians aren't a threat to China. The division level border skirmishes between the PLA and Soviet Army back in the day just can't happen anymore. The Russian army simply can't muster and move the troops to the East that quickly and China has, at the very least, limited MAD with Russia. The Chinese are getting what they need via peaceful means at present, so they feel no need or desire to rock the boat, especially because Russia is distracting and/or annoying the United States, so it's beneficial to China to keep the paper bear off to the side roaring, supporting their efforts as needed. If Putin or a future Russian leader plays hard ball, or China gets more resource hungry, that could easily change in a day.
Iron_Captain wrote: Russia's relation with China is also pretty complicated. One one side, China really wants an alliance and cooperation with Russia so they can get access to Siberian resources and Russia wants to ally with China to have the power to stand up to the West. This has resulted in the SCO. On the other side however, is the fact that China has become much more economically powerful than Russia since the '90s. Therefore, in any alliance Russia will actually be the junior partner to China. This is of course utterly unacceptable to Russia, an insult to Russian honour and imperial tradition. Therefore Putin has been pretty reluctant in going ahead with alliances like the SCO. It is a difficult dilemma. On one hand is an alliance with China neccessary if Russia wants to maintain its great power status, but on the other hand would an alliance with China actually diminish this great power status.
In any case, China is no military threat to Russia, there is no need for China to be agressive towards Russia. Why would it go through an incredibly destructive war to obtain resources that it could also obtain by economic infiltration and other peaceful means much more profitable than war?
They likely would not, just as the US would not likely go to war with Russia over resources in the Arctic, it's just a much more plausible potential future threat, not that it's necessarily a particularly likely one, as all three powers in question possessing significant nuclear weapons stockpiles and nobody wants to deal with that.
As you noted, it's the economic imbalance that's going to realistically be the bigger issue, with Russia having 1/10th the population of China and 1/4th the GDP and that gap only likely to grow even more over time, and the Chinese have been taking advantage of that power in recent economic deals to their advantage.
The nightmare scenario for Russia is then a Europe that is aliented and no longer dependent on Russian energy products, and deep economic reliance on the much more centralized and coordinated (and thus better able to leverage its economic power than the various "federated" EU nations) China in an increasingly one-sided balance and the Chinese gaining significant, possibly controlling, stakes in Russian energy industries and Siberian resources. Will this happen? Who knows. But something like that is far more likely than US/EU interests lusting after Siberia.
The Chinese are very good playing the long game, and are perfectly fine with waiting years or decades to accomplish their goals, at least relative to Western powers who lose interest or get distracted far more quickly. They're very content for Russian military assets to be focused thousands of miles away and Russian social animosity pointed elsewhere while the Russian economy is forced to look for new investors and markets to sustain itself. The big winners of the Ukraine crisis is China.
As a bit of a random side-note, I noticed that Russia isn't going to be present at this year's UK Fairford Airshow. That in itself isn't surprising, but what's more interesting is that they haven't actually been invited.
Especially when you look at some of the countries that have been invited.
Iron_Captain wrote: Russia's relation with China is also pretty complicated. One one side, China really wants an alliance and cooperation with Russia so they can get access to Siberian resources and Russia wants to ally with China to have the power to stand up to the West. This has resulted in the SCO. On the other side however, is the fact that China has become much more economically powerful than Russia since the '90s. Therefore, in any alliance Russia will actually be the junior partner to China. This is of course utterly unacceptable to Russia, an insult to Russian honour and imperial tradition. Therefore Putin has been pretty reluctant in going ahead with alliances like the SCO. It is a difficult dilemma. On one hand is an alliance with China neccessary if Russia wants to maintain its great power status, but on the other hand would an alliance with China actually diminish this great power status. In any case, China is no military threat to Russia, there is no need for China to be agressive towards Russia. Why would it go through an incredibly destructive war to obtain resources that it could also obtain by economic infiltration and other peaceful means much more profitable than war?
They likely would not, just as the US would not likely go to war with Russia over resources in the Arctic, it's just a much more plausible potential future threat, not that it's necessarily a particularly likely one, as all three powers in question possessing significant nuclear weapons stockpiles and nobody wants to deal with that.
As you noted, it's the economic imbalance that's going to realistically be the bigger issue, with Russia having 1/10th the population of China and 1/4th the GDP and that gap only likely to grow even more over time, and the Chinese have been taking advantage of that power in recent economic deals to their advantage.
The nightmare scenario for Russia is then a Europe that is aliented and no longer dependent on Russian energy products, and deep economic reliance on the much more centralized and coordinated (and thus better able to leverage its economic power than the various "federated" EU nations) China in an increasingly one-sided balance and the Chinese gaining significant, possibly controlling, stakes in Russian energy industries and Siberian resources. Will this happen? Who knows. But something like that is far more likely than US/EU interests lusting after Siberia.
The Chinese are very good playing the long game, and are perfectly fine with waiting years or decades to accomplish their goals, at least relative to Western powers who lose interest or get distracted far more quickly. They're very content for Russian military assets to be focused thousands of miles away and Russian social animosity pointed elsewhere while the Russian economy is forced to look for new investors and markets to sustain itself. The big winners of the Ukraine crisis is China.
Your post gave Putin nightmares. China is the laughing third here. It is now able to expand its influence over Russia greatly, while NATO gets distracted. As the Slovenes say: Kjer se prepirata dva, tretji dobiček ima. Where two fight, the third profits.
Pacific wrote: As a bit of a random side-note, I noticed that Russia isn't going to be present at this year's UK Fairford Airshow. That in itself isn't surprising, but what's more interesting is that they haven't actually been invited.
Especially when you look at some of the countries that have been invited.
And seeing as this is still a thing, a touch of the human side of the conflict.
Edit: Spoilered for content - the guy's hand is a bit torn up
Spoiler:
* Captures tank crewman.
"You're Russian?",
"No Ukrainian, I was a mine worker, I'm here for my starving family".
"He's a Separatist? Then why are we trying to help him, let him die in the mud".
The first article that appears when searching "geneva convention filming prisoners" says that it is legal. Or rather it doesn't mention it so its by default legal. Cue images of all the captured Ukrainian soldiers from the start of the war. =P
Nations doing it is illegal, anyone else isn't. So newspapers can do it as can individual soldiers, but if its the state then that's when the article's broken. Seeing as there's plenty of state sponsored media out there then of course this doesn't become an issue when a state wants to parade prisoners about.
That article also mentions that the bodies of the dead aren't covered by this ...as they aren't alive to be taken prisoner. Again que those wonderful graphic images on the Russian media of killed Ukrainian servicemen.
Meh, but as if anyone even bothers following any of the Geneva convention's in the first place. Its just a happy coincidence that that isn't illegal.
Man I thought that the other soldiers were just going to shoot that guy when he said he was Ukrainian. The medic helped him anyway, but the commander still seemed to want to kill him. Who knows what happened after that clip though...
But aye, I came across this in another thread on this topic elsewhere and thought that showing what the soldiers act like was just as informative as all the political pandering. The Ukrainians are probably more stressed out than the Russians are, though then again the Russians are more charged up with all their propaganda. It'd be interesting to see some Russians capturing a Ukrainian or some Separatists doing the same (the Russians seem to be leaving the Ukrainians to fight among themselves at this point as they've managed to capture more land than they'd ever hoped for).
Edit: Oh, and something that, despite particular trolls, I can respect Dakka for is that this site doesn't ban members for noting Russians involvement in this war. Other sites I've been on have put out blanket bans on that because they were receiving so much abuse from state sponsored trolls. Guess Dakka deals with so many dissenting topics that this one's just a drop in the ocean. =P
Edit: Oh, and something that, despite particular trolls, I can respect Dakka for is that this site doesn't ban members for noting Russians involvement in this war. Other sites I've been on have put out blanket bans on that because they were receiving so much abuse from state sponsored trolls. Guess Dakka deals with so many dissenting topics that this one's just a drop in the ocean. =P
This thread has, proportionate to its size, spawned about a tenth of the headaches for us of any gun thread/religion thread that could dream of reaching this length before descending into madness and getting locked. It's doing a pretty good job.
Yeah I did see that, I was going to post it but a few things made me question it. One was if they were constantly surveying it wouldnt the drone had been shot down? And only four tanks makes it seem iffy.
On the other hand it looks to be well built, something the russian rebels don't have the resources for. Either way we know the russians are in there supplying fighting and training the ethnic russians, especially with the body bags coming home the capture soldiers and the interviews.
Too far into the occupied area to send some artillery down on it. =/
As with pretty much all the statements in this thread, aye its obviously the Russian military who's building this. Unless they happened to just give the Seperatists all that equipment and train them how to build it. ...Which I suspect will be the argument coming from the Russians no doubt. Are the Russians just using preexisting Ukrainian bases for all their deployments and have been using ad-hoc camps until this point? I'd have thought that they would have built there own already by this point.
Weird seeing a military base without hesco barriers, do the Russians not use those? I guess they're so close to their own country and have the local manufacturing that they can get away with transporting big chunks of concrete. Still its odd seeing a base thrown up so quickly not using those things nowadays.
That sized drone that high up... almost impossible to knock out. I guess that the pilot would need to be really close to the installation. That's got to be all sorts of dangerous.
A little drone that's white against a light background probably isn't that easy to see with the naked eye. Nobody was apparently operating any radar either, or maybe they just don't care if the international press gets hold of this information, as well nobody seemed to do much when they took half a country.
A little drone that's white against a light background probably isn't that easy to see with the naked eye. Nobody was apparently operating any radar either, or maybe they just don't care if the international press gets hold of this information, as well nobody seemed to do much when they took half a country.
I'm not saying that's the drone this operator used... I just pulled an example out of Amazon.
Besides, if it were noticed... they wouldn't waste time trying to shoot it. They'd do a manhunt to find the operator since he has to be nearby. Dangerous...
Oh no, I'm just saying that the Russian probably either didn't notice or just didn't care. They've managed to bs their way out of worse things, so one little base probably doesn't matter all that much from their perspective.
Aye though dangerous work for that drone operator. I don't know how the Russians treat their prisoners (probably not too badly, but then again don't want anyone blabbing about them), but he's just lucky this wasn't a Seperatist base and they caught him. =P
That is not a Russian base. If it was, it would have more than just 4 tanks.
Anyone suggesting the seperatists aren't capable of building military bases is just being weird.
Donbass is quite a large area with plenty of resources to build a base from. The seperatists also have the knowledge, there is likely to be engineers in their ranks (because many of them are defected Ukrainian military or ex-Russian military, and all seperatists should have at least some military training because of conscription in Ukraine and Russia)
Around 8:30 a.m. on Sept. 11 last year, Duval Arthur, director of the Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness for St. Mary Parish, Louisiana, got a call from a resident who had just received a disturbing text message. “Toxic fume hazard warning in this area until 1:30 PM,” the message read. “Take Shelter. Check Local Media and columbiachemical.com.”
St. Mary Parish is home to many processing plants for chemicals and natural gas, and keeping track of dangerous accidents at those plants is Arthur’s job. But he hadn’t heard of any chemical release that morning. In fact, he hadn’t even heard of Columbia Chemical. St. Mary Parish had a Columbian Chemicals plant, which made carbon black, a petroleum product used in rubber and plastics. But he’d heard nothing from them that morning, either. Soon, two other residents called and reported the same text message. Arthur was worried: Had one of his employees sent out an alert without telling him?
If Arthur had checked Twitter, he might have become much more worried. Hundreds of Twitter accounts were documenting a disaster right down the road. “A powerful explosion heard from miles away happened at a chemical plant in Centerville, Louisiana #ColumbianChemicals,” a man named Jon Merritt tweeted. The #ColumbianChemicals hashtag was full of eyewitness accounts of the horror in Centerville. @AnnRussela shared an image of flames engulfing the plant. @Ksarah12 posted a video of surveillance footage from a local gas station, capturing the flash of the explosion. Others shared a video in which thick black smoke rose in the distance.
Dozens of journalists, media outlets and politicians, from Louisiana to New York City, found their Twitter accounts inundated with messages about the disaster. “Heather, I’m sure that the explosion at the #ColumbianChemicals is really dangerous. Louisiana is really screwed now,” a user named @EricTraPPP tweeted at the New Orleans Times-Picayune reporter Heather Nolan. Another posted a screenshot of CNN’s home page, showing that the story had already made national news. ISIS had claimed credit for the attack, according to one YouTube video; in it, a man showed his TV screen, tuned to an Arabic news channel, on which masked ISIS fighters delivered a speech next to looping footage of an explosion. A woman named Anna McClaren (@zpokodon9) tweeted at Karl Rove: “Karl, Is this really ISIS who is responsible for #ColumbianChemicals? Tell @Obama that we should bomb Iraq!” But anyone who took the trouble to check CNN.com would have found no news of a spectacular Sept. 11 attack by ISIS. It was all fake: the screenshot, the videos, the photographs.
In St. Mary Parish, Duval Arthur quickly made a few calls and found that none of his employees had sent the alert. He called Columbian Chemicals, which reported no problems at the plant. Roughly two hours after the first text message was sent, the company put out a news release, explaining that reports of an explosion were false. When I called Arthur a few months later, he dismissed the incident as a tasteless prank, timed to the anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. “Personally I think it’s just a real sad, sick sense of humor,” he told me. “It was just someone who just liked scaring the daylights out of people.” Authorities, he said, had tried to trace the numbers that the text messages had come from, but with no luck. (The F.B.I. told me the investigation was still open.)
The Columbian Chemicals hoax was not some simple prank by a bored sadist. It was a highly coordinated disinformation campaign, involving dozens of fake accounts that posted hundreds of tweets for hours, targeting a list of figures precisely chosen to generate maximum attention. The perpetrators didn’t just doctor screenshots from CNN; they also created fully functional clones of the websites of Louisiana TV stations and newspapers. The YouTube video of the man watching TV had been tailor-made for the project. A Wikipedia page was even created for the Columbian Chemicals disaster, which cited the fake YouTube video. As the virtual assault unfolded, it was complemented by text messages to actual residents in St. Mary Parish. It must have taken a team of programmers and content producers to pull off.
And the hoax was just one in a wave of similar attacks during the second half of last year. On Dec. 13, two months after a handful of Ebola cases in the United States touched off a minor media panic, many of the same Twitter accounts used to spread the Columbian Chemicals hoax began to post about an outbreak of Ebola in Atlanta. The campaign followed the same pattern of fake news reports and videos, this time under the hashtag #EbolaInAtlanta, which briefly trended in Atlanta. Again, the attention to detail was remarkable, suggesting a tremendous amount of effort. A YouTube video showed a team of hazmat-suited medical workers transporting a victim from the airport. Beyoncé’s recent single “7/11” played in the background, an apparent attempt to establish the video’s contemporaneity. A truck in the parking lot sported the logo of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.
On the same day as the Ebola hoax, a totally different group of accounts began spreading a rumor that an unarmed black woman had been shot to death by police. They all used the hashtag #shockingmurderinatlanta. Here again, the hoax seemed designed to piggyback on real public anxiety; that summer and fall were marked by protests over the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. In this case, a blurry video purports to show the shooting, as an onlooker narrates. Watching it, I thought I recognized the voice — it sounded the same as the man watching TV in the Columbian Chemicals video, the one in which ISIS supposedly claims responsibility. The accent was unmistakable, if unplaceable, and in both videos he was making a very strained attempt to sound American. Somehow the result was vaguely Australian.
Who was behind all of this? When I stumbled on it last fall, I had an idea. I was already investigating a shadowy organization in St. Petersburg, Russia, that spreads false information on the Internet. It has gone by a few names, but I will refer to it by its best known: the Internet Research Agency. The agency had become known for employing hundreds of Russians to post pro-Kremlin propaganda online under fake identities, including on Twitter, in order to create the illusion of a massive army of supporters; it has often been called a “troll farm.” The more I investigated this group, the more links I discovered between it and the hoaxes. In April, I went to St. Petersburg to learn more about the agency and its brand of information warfare, which it has aggressively deployed against political opponents at home, Russia’s perceived enemies abroad and, more recently, me.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Seven months after the Columbian Chemicals hoax, I was in a dim restaurant in St. Petersburg, peering out the window at an office building at 55 Savushkina Street, the last known home of the Internet Research Agency. It sits in St. Petersburg’s northwestern Primorsky District, a quiet neighborhood of ugly Soviet apartment buildings and equally ugly new office complexes. Among the latter is 55 Savushkina; from the front, its perfect gray symmetry, framed by the rectangular pillars that flank its entrance, suggests the grim impenetrability of a medieval fortress. Behind the glass doors, a pair of metal turnstiles stand guard at the top of a short flight of stairs in the lobby. At 9 o’clock on this Friday night in April, except for the stairwell and the lobby, the building was entirely dark.
This puzzled my dining companion, a former agency employee named Ludmila Savchuk. She shook her head as she lifted the heavy floral curtain to take another look. It was a traditional Russian restaurant, with a dining room done up like a parlor from the early 1900s, complete with bentwood chairs and a vintage globe that showed Alaska as part of Russia. Savchuk’s 5-year-old son sat next to her, slurping down a bowl of ukha, a traditional fish soup. For two and a half months, Savchuk told me, she had worked 12-hour shifts in the building, always beginning at 9 a.m. and finishing at 9 p.m., at which point she and her co-workers would eagerly stream out the door at once. “At 9 p.m. sharp, there should be a crowd of people walking outside the building,” she said. “Nine p.m. sharp.” One Russian newspaper put the number of employees at 400, with a budget of at least 20 million rubles (roughly $400,000) a month. During her time in the organization, there were many departments, creating content for every popular social network: LiveJournal, which remains popular in Russia; VKontakte, Russia’s homegrown version of Facebook; Facebook; Twitter; Instagram; and the comment sections of Russian news outlets. One employee estimated the operation filled 40 rooms.
Every day at the Internet Research Agency was essentially the same, Savchuk told me. The first thing employees did upon arriving at their desks was to switch on an Internet proxy service, which hid their I.P. addresses from the places they posted; those digital addresses can sometimes be used to reveal the real identity of the poster. Savchuk would be given a list of the opinions she was responsible for promulgating that day. Workers received a constant stream of “technical tasks” — point-by-point exegeses of the themes they were to address, all pegged to the latest news. Ukraine was always a major topic, because of the civil war there between Russian-backed separatists and the Ukrainian Army; Savchuk and her co-workers would post comments that disparaged the Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, and highlighted Ukrainian Army atrocities. Russian domestic affairs were also a major topic. Last year, after a financial crisis hit Russia and the ruble collapsed, the professional trolls left optimistic posts about the pace of recovery. Savchuk also says that in March, after the opposition leader Boris Nemtsov was murdered, she and her entire team were moved to the department that left comments on the websites of Russian news outlets and ordered to suggest that the opposition itself had set up the murder.
Savchuk told me she shared an office with about a half-dozen teammates. It was smaller than most, because she worked in the elite Special Projects department. While other workers churned out blandly pro-Kremlin comments, her department created appealing online characters who were supposed to stand out from the horde. Savchuk posed as three of these creations, running a blog for each one on LiveJournal. One alter ego was a fortuneteller named Cantadora. The spirit world offered Cantadora insight into relationships, weight loss, feng shui — and, occasionally, geopolitics. Energies she discerned in the universe invariably showed that its arc bent toward Russia. She foretold glory for Vladimir Putin, defeat for Barack Obama and Petro Poroshenko. The point was to weave propaganda seamlessly into what appeared to be the nonpolitical musings of an everyday person.
In fact, she was a troll. The word “troll” was popularized in the early 1990s to denounce the people who derailed conversation on Usenet discussion lists with interminable flame wars, or spammed chat rooms with streams of disgusting photos, choking users with a cloud of filth. As the Internet has grown, the problem posed by trolls has grown more salient even as their tactics have remained remarkably constant. Today an ISIS supporter might adopt a pseudonym to harass a critical journalist on Twitter, or a right-wing agitator in the United States might smear demonstrations against police brutality by posing as a thieving, violent protester. Any major conflict is accompanied by a raging online battle between trolls on both sides.
As Savchuk and other former employees describe it, the Internet Research Agency had industrialized the art of trolling. Management was obsessed with statistics — page views, number of posts, a blog’s place on LiveJournal’s traffic charts — and team leaders compelled hard work through a system of bonuses and fines. “It was a very strong corporate feeling,” Savchuk says. Her schedule gave her two 12-hour days in a row, followed by two days off. Over those two shifts she had to meet a quota of five political posts, 10 nonpolitical posts and 150 to 200 comments on other workers’ posts. The grueling schedule wore her down. She began to feel queasy, she said, posting vitriol about opposition leaders of whom she had no actual opinion, or writing nasty words about Ukrainians when some of her closest acquaintances, including her own ex-husband, were Ukrainian.
Employees were mostly in their 20s but were drawn from a broad cross-section of Russian society. It seemed as if the agency’s task was so large that it would hire almost anyone who responded to the many ads it posted on job boards, no matter how undereducated or politically ignorant they were. Posts teemed with logical and grammatical errors. “They were so stupid,” says Marat Burkhardt, who worked for two months in the department of forums, posting 135 comments a day on little-read message boards about remote Russian towns. “You see these people with a lot of tattoos. They’re so cool, like they’re from New York; very hip clothing, very hip tattoos, like they’re from Williamsburg. But they are stupid.” In office conversation, they used gay slurs to refer to Petro Poroshenko and called Barack Obama a monkey. Management tried to rectify their ignorance with grammar classes. Others had “politology” classes to outline the proper Russian point of view on current events.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Yet the exact point of their work was left unclear to them. The handful of employees I spoke with did not even know the name of the company’s chief executive. They had signed a nondisclosure agreement but no official contract. Salaries were surprisingly high for the work; Savchuk’s was 41,000 rubles a month ($777), or as much as a tenured university professor earns. “I can’t say they clearly explain to you what your purpose there is,” Savchuk says. “But they created such an atmosphere that people would understand they were doing something important and secretive and very highly paid. And that they won’t be able to find a job like this anywhere else.”
Savchuk is 34, but her taste in clothes runs toward the teenage: The night of our dinner she wore a plaid dress and a billowing neon yellow jacket, and her head was swaddled in a fuzzy hood with animal ears. She credits her innocent appearance for allowing her to infiltrate the Internet Research Agency without raising alarms. While employed there, she copied dozens of documents to her personal email account and also plied her co-workers for information. She made a clandestine video of the office. In February, she leaked it all to a reporter for Moi Raion, a local newspaper known for its independent reporting. The documents, together with her story, offered the most detailed look yet into the daily life of a pro-Kremlin troll. Though she quit the agency the day the exposé was published, she was continuing her surveillance from the outside. She brought a camera to our dinner in hopes of documenting the changing of the shifts, which she planned to post to the VKontakte page of Information Peace, the group she founded to fight the agency. Her ultimate goal is to shut it down entirely, believing that its information warfare is contributing to an increasingly dark atmosphere in Russia. “Information peace is the start of real peace,” she says.
But at 10 minutes after 9 p.m., still no crowd had entered or left 55 Savushkina. Finally, around 9:30, a group of five young people approached the building and walked inside. Savchuk perked up, grabbed the camera and began to film the scene. Now more started filtering in, each of them stopping at the guard desk to check in. I counted at least 30 in all. Savchuk told me with pride that she believed the agency had changed its schedule to confound journalists, who began to stake out the place after her exposé.
Savchuk is accustomed to antagonizing powerful people. She has been a longtime environmental activist in the town of Pushkin, the suburb of St. Petersburg where she lives; her main cause before the troll farm was saving forests and parks from being paved over by well-connected developers. Last year she even ran for a seat on her municipal council as an independent, which in Russia requires a level of optimism bordering on delusion. On Election Day, she told me, state employees — health care workers, teachers, law enforcement, etc. — came to the polls wielding lists of candidates they had been “encouraged” to vote for, all of them associated with United Russia, the governing party of Vladimir Putin. (She lost her race.) Savchuk has filed a lawsuit against the Internet Research Agency for violating labor rights laws, citing the lack of official contracts. She has enlisted the help of a well-known human rights lawyer named Ivan Pavlov, who has spent years fighting for transparency laws in Russia; he took on Savchuk’s case in hopes that it would force the agency to answer questions about its business on the record.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Several Russian media outlets have claimed that the agency is funded by Evgeny Prigozhin, an oligarch restaurateur called “the Kremlin’s chef” in the independent press for his lucrative government contracts and his close relationship with Putin. When a reporter from the opposition paper Novaya Gazeta infiltrated the agency posing as a job seeker, she discovered that one of the team leaders was an employee of Prigozhin’s Concord holding company. (The reporter was familiar with her because the woman was famous among journalists for having been deployed by Prigozhin to spy on Novaya Gazeta.) The suspicion around Prigozhin was bolstered when emails leaked by hackers showed an accountant at Concord approving payments to the agency. If the speculation is accurate, it would not be the first time that Prigozhin has used his enormous wealth to fund quixotic schemes against his enemies: According to Novaya Gazeta, a documentary he backed, which later ran on the Kremlin-controlled NTV, claimed that the protesters who participated in the enormous anti-Putin demonstrations of 2011 were paid agents provocateurs, some of them bribed by United States government officials, who fed them cookies. “I think of him as Dr. Evil,” says Andrei Soshnikov, the reporter at Moi Raion to whom Savchuk leaked her documents. (My calls to Concord went unreturned.)
Savchuk’s revelations about the agency have fascinated Russia not because they are shocking but because they confirm what everyone has long suspected: The Russian Internet is awash in trolls. “This troll business becomes more popular year by year,” says Platon Mamatov, who says that he ran his own troll farm in the Ural Mountains from 2008 to 2013. During that time he employed from 20 to 40 people, mostly students and young mothers, to carry out online tasks for Kremlin contacts and local and regional authorities from Putin’s United Russia party. Mamatov says there are scores of operations like his around the country, working for government authorities at every level. Because the industry is secretive, with its funds funneled through a maze of innocuous-sounding contracts and shell businesses, it is difficult to estimate exactly how many people are at work trolling today. But Mamatov claims “there are thousands — I’m not sure about how many, but yes, really, thousands.”
The boom in pro-Kremlin trolling can be traced to the antigovernment protests of 2011, when tens of thousands of people took to the streets after evidence of fraud in the recent Parliamentary election emerged. The protests were organized largely over Facebook and Twitter and spearheaded by leaders, like the anticorruption crusader Alexei Navalny, who used LiveJournal blogs to mobilize support. The following year, when Vyascheslav Volodin, the new deputy head of Putin’s administration and architect of his domestic policy, came into office, one of his main tasks was to rein in the Internet. Volodin, a lawyer who studied engineering in college, approached the problem as if it were a design flaw in a heating system. Forbes Russia reported that Volodin installed in his office a custom-designed computer terminal loaded with a system called Prism, which monitored public sentiment online using 60 million sources. According to the website of its manufacturer, Prism “actively tracks the social media activities that result in increased social tension, disorderly conduct, protest sentiments and extremism.” Or, as Forbes put it, “Prism sees social media as a battlefield.”
The battle was conducted on multiple fronts. Laws were passed requiring bloggers to register with the state. A blacklist allowed the government to censor websites without a court order. Internet platforms like Yandex were subjected to political pressure, while others, like VKontakte, were brought under the control of Kremlin allies. Putin gave ideological cover to the crackdown by calling the entire Internet a “C.I.A. project,” one that Russia needed to be protected from. Restrictions online were paired with a new wave of digital propaganda. The government consulted with the same public relations firms that worked with major corporate brands on social-media strategy. It began paying fashion and fitness bloggers to place pro-Kremlin material among innocuous posts about shoes and diets, according to Yelizaveta Surnacheva, a journalist with the magazine Kommersant Vlast. Surnacheva told me over Skype that the government was even trying to place propaganda with popular gay bloggers — a surprising choice given the notorious new law against “gay propaganda,” which fines anyone who promotes homosexuality to minors.
All of this has contributed to a dawning sense, among the Russian journalists and activists I spoke with, that the Internet is no longer a natural medium for political opposition. “The myth that the Internet is controlled by the opposition is very, very old,” says Leonid Volkov, a liberal politician and campaign manager to Alexei Navalny. “It’s not true since at least three years.” Part of this is simple demographics: The Internet audience has expanded from its early adopters, who were more likely to be well-educated liberal intelligentsia, to the whole of Russia, which overwhelmingly supports Putin. Also, by working every day to spread Kremlin propaganda, the paid trolls have made it impossible for the normal Internet user to separate truth from fiction.
“The point is to spoil it, to create the atmosphere of hate, to make it so stinky that normal people won’t want to touch it,” Volkov said, when we met in the office of Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation. “You have to remember the Internet population of Russia is just over 50 percent. The rest are yet to join, and when they join it’s very important what is their first impression.” The Internet still remains the one medium where the opposition can reliably get its message out. But their message is now surrounded by so much garbage from trolls that readers can become resistant before the message even gets to them. During the protests, a favorite tactic of the opposition was making anti-Putin hashtags trend on Twitter. Today, waves of trolls and bots regularly promote pro-Putin hashtags. What once was an exhilarating act of popular defiance now feels empty. “It kind of discredited the idea of political hashtags,” says Ilya Klishin, the web editor for the independent television station TV Rain who, in 2011, created the Facebook page for the antigovernment protests.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Russia’s information war might be thought of as the biggest trolling operation in history, and its target is nothing less than the utility of the Internet as a democratic space. In the midst of such a war, the Runet (as the Russian Internet is often called) can be an unpleasant place for anyone caught in the crossfire. Soon after I met Leonid Volkov, he wrote a post on his Facebook wall about our interview, saying that he had spoken with someone from The New York Times. A former pro-Kremlin blogger later warned me about this. Kremlin allies, he explained, monitored Volkov’s page, and now they would be on guard. “That was not smart,” he said.
The chain that links the Columbian Chemicals hoax to the Internet Research Agency begins with an act of digital subterfuge perpetrated by its online enemies. Last summer, a group called Anonymous International — believed to be unaffiliated with the well-known hacktivist group Anonymous — published a cache of hundreds of emails said to have been stolen from employees at the agency. It was just one hack in a long series that Anonymous International had carried out against the Kremlin in recent months. The group leaked embarrassing photos of Putin allies and incriminating emails among officials. It claimed to have hacked into Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev’s phone, and reportedly hacked his Twitter account, tweeting: “I’m resigning. I am ashamed of this government’s actions. Forgive me.”
The emails indicated that the Internet Research Agency had begun to troll in English. One document outlined a project called “World Translation”; the problem, it explained, was that the foreign Internet was biased four to one against Russia, and the project aimed to change the ratio. Another email contained a spreadsheet that listed some of the troll accounts the agency was using on the English-language web. After BuzzFeed reported on the leak, I used the spreadsheet to start mapping the network of accounts on Facebook and Twitter, trying to draw connections.
One account was called “I Am Ass.” Ass had a Twitter account, an Instagram account, multiple Facebook accounts and his own website. In his avatars, Ass was depicted as a pair of cartoon buttocks with an ugly, smirking face. He filled his social-media presences with links to news articles, along with his own commentary. Ass had a puerile sense of humor and only a rudimentary grasp of the English language. He also really hated Barack Obama. Ass denounced Obama in posts strewn with all-caps rants and scatological puns. One characteristic post linked to a news article about an ISIS massacre in Iraq, which Ass shared on Facebook with the comment: “I’m scared and farting! ISIS is a monster awakened by Obama when he unleashed this disastrous Iraq war!”
Despite his unpleasant disposition, Ass had a half-dozen or so fans who regularly liked and commented on his posts. These fans shared some unusual characteristics. Their Facebook accounts had all been created in the summer of 2014. They all appeared to be well-dressed young men and women who lived in large American cities, yet they seemed to have no real-life friends. Instead, they spent their free time leaving anti-Obama comments on the Facebook posts of American media outlets like CNN, Politico and Fox News. Their main Facebook interactions, especially those of the women, appeared to be with strangers who commented on their physical appearance. The women were all very attractive — so attractive, indeed, that a search revealed that some of their profile photos had been stolen from models and actors. It became clear that the vast majority of Ass’s fans were not real people. They were also trolls.
I friended as many of the trolls on Facebook as I could and began to observe their ways. Most of the content they shared was drawn from a network of other pages that, like Ass’s, were clearly meant to produce entertaining and shareable social-media content. There was the patriotic Spread Your Wings, which described itself as “a community for everyone whose heart is with America.” Spread Your Wings posted photos of American flags and memes about how great it was to be an American, but the patriotism rang hollow once you tried to parse the frequent criticisms of Obama, an incoherent mishmash of liberal and conservative attacks that no actual American would espouse. There was also Art Gone Conscious, which posted bad art and then tenuously connected it to Obama’s policy failures, and the self-explanatory Celebrities Against Obama. The posts churned out every day by this network of pages were commented on and shared by the same group of trolls, a virtual Potemkin village of disaffected Americans.
After following the accounts for a few weeks, I saw a strange notification on Facebook. One account, which claimed to be a woman from Seattle named Polly Turner, RSVPed to a real-life event. It was a talk in New York City to commemorate the opening of an art exhibit called Material Evidence. I was vaguely aware of Material Evidence, thanks to eye-catching advertisements that had appeared in subway stations and on the sides of buses throughout New York City: a black-and-white photo of masked men in camouflage, overlaid with the slogan “Syria, Ukraine … Who’s Next?” Material Evidence’s website described it as a traveling exhibition that would reveal “the full truth” about the civil war in Syria, as well as about 2014’s Euromaidan revolution in Ukraine, through a combination of “unique footage, artefacts, video.” I clicked on the Material Evidence talk and saw that a number of other trolls had been invited, including my old friend I Am Ass.
Walking into Material Evidence, mounted last September in the cavernous ArtBeam gallery in Chelsea, was like walking into a real-life version of the hall of mirrors I’d stumbled into on Facebook. A sign at the front declared that the show did not “support a specific political goal,” but the message became clear as soon as I began to browse the images. Large, well-composed photos testified to the barbarity of the Syrian rebels, bent on slaughtering handsome Syrian soldiers and innocent civilians alike. A grim panorama showed a gymnasium supposedly used by rebels to torture prisoners. There was a heroic, sunlit portrait of a Syrian Army officer. A room hidden behind a curtain displayed gory photos of rebel-caused civilian causalities, “provided by the Syrian ministry of defense.”
Then there were the pictures from the Ukrainian revolution, which focused almost exclusively on the Right Sector, a small group of violent, right-wing, anti-Russian protesters with a fondness for black balaclavas. Russian authorities have seized upon Right Sector to paint the entire revolution, backed by a huge swath of Ukrainian society, as orchestrated by neo-fascist thugs. The show’s decision to juxtapose the rebellions in Syria and Ukraine was never clearly explained, perhaps because the only connection possible was that both targeted leaders supported by Russia.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
On the floor in front of many of the photos sat the actual items that appeared in them, displayed under glass cases. How, exactly, did organizers procure the very same battered motorcycle helmet that a Ukrainian protester wore in a photo while brawling with riot police? Who had fronted the money to purchase a mangled white van, supposedly used by Syrian rebels in a botched suicide bombing, and transport it to New York City? Few answers were forthcoming from Benjamin Hiller, the Berlin-based German-American photojournalist who was put forth as the curator of Material Evidence. He sat at a table in the front of the gallery, a heavyset bearded man dressed entirely in black. He told me that the show had been organized by an independent collective of European, Russian and Syrian war photographers who were fed up with the one-sided view of conflicts presented by Western media. He said they simply wanted to show the “other side.” Hiller claimed that the funds to rent the space, take out the ads, transport the material and create a $40,000 grant advertised on the Material Evidence website had been raised through “crowdfunding.” (Hiller has since left the organization and says that because of the show’s “misinformations” and “nonjournalistic approach,” he “does not want to be affiliated anymore with the project.”)
When I got home, I searched Twitter for signs of a campaign. Sure enough, dozens of accounts had been spamming rave reviews under the hashtag #MaterialEvidence. I clicked on one, a young woman in aviator sunglasses calling herself Zoe Foreman. (I later discovered her avatar had been stolen.) Most of her tweets were unremarkable song lyrics and inspirational quotes. But on Sept. 11 of last year, she spent hours spamming politicians and journalists about a horrific chemical plant explosion in St. Mary Parish, La. The source field on Twitter showed that the tweets Zoe Foreman — and the majority of other trolls — sent about #ColumbianChemicals were posted using a tool called Masss Post, which is associated with a nonworking page on the domain Add1.ru. According to online records, Add1.ru was originally registered in January 2009 by Mikhail Burchik, whose email address remained connected to the domain until 2012. Documents leaked by Anonymous International listed a Mikhail Burchik as the executive director of the Internet Research Agency.
In early February, I called Burchik, a young tech entrepreneur in St. Petersburg, to ask him about the hoax and its connection to the Internet Research Agency. In an article for the newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, the German journalist Julian Hans had claimed that Burchik confirmed the authenticity of the leaked documents. But when I called Burchik, he denied working at the Internet Research Agency. “I have heard of it, but I don’t work in this organization,” he said. Burchik said he had never heard of the Masss Post app; he had no specific memory of the Add1.ru domain, he said, but he noted that he had bought and sold many domains and didn’t remember them all. Burchik suggested that perhaps a different Mikhail Burchik was the agency’s executive director. But the email address used by the Mikhail Burchik in the leak matched the address listed at that time on the website of the Mikhail Burchik I spoke with.
In St. Petersburg, I finally had a chance to compare notes with Andrei Soshnikov, the young investigative journalist at Moi Raion to whom Ludmila Savchuk leaked her documents. Soshnikov is an indefatigable reporter: During one investigation, he had gone so far as to create a 3-D computer model of a roadway in order to calculate how much asphalt had been stolen during its construction. He was one of the first journalists to expose the Internet Research Agency when he went undercover and got a job there in 2013. Since then, he had followed the agency’s Russian trolls as obsessively as I had been tracking their English counterparts.
I showed Soshnikov a YouTube video posted on Facebook by one of the trolls. The video was a slick animated infographic about the faults of the United States Secret Service. What had caught my attention was the narrator. He sounded just like the voice from the videos spread during the Columbian Chemicals and Atlanta shooting hoaxes: a man trying desperately to sound American but coming off as Australian instead.
Soshnikov instantly recognized the style of the animation. It was made, he said, by an outfit called Infosurfing, which posts pro-Kremlin infographics on Instagram and VKontakte. Soshnikov showed me how he used a service called Yomapic, which maps the locations of social-media users, to determine that photos posted to Infosurfing’s Instagram account came from 55 Savushkina. He had been monitoring all of the content posted from 55 Savushkina for weeks and had assembled a huge database of troll content.
He brought up Infosurfing’s YouTube channel, and as we scrolled down, I noticed several videos in the same style as the Secret Service animation. In fact, Infosurfing had posted the exact same video on its own account — except instead of the unfortunate Australian voice-over, it was narrated in Russian. It was the most tantalizing connection yet: It seemed as if the man in the hoax videos had worked for an outfit connected to the same building that housed the Internet Research Agency.
Still, no one had heard of any department that might have orchestrated the hoax. The English-language trolling team was an elite and secretive group. Marat Burkhardt, who worked in the forums department, was asked to try out for an English-language team but didn’t get the job. The only person I spoke with who worked in the English department was a woman named Katarina Aistova. A former hotel receptionist, she told me she joined the Internet Research Agency when it was in a previous, smaller office. I found her through the Anonymous International leak, which included emails she had sent to her bosses, reporting on the pro-Putin comments she left on sites like The Blaze and Politico. One of her assignments had been to write an essay from the point of view of an average American woman. “I live in such developed society, so that people have practically ceased to walk on foot,” she wrote. When I emailed Aistova, she wasn’t eager to talk. She told me she had been harassed by critics of the Internet Research Agency after her email appeared in the leak; some men had even come to her door. She would meet me for an interview, but only if she could bring her brother for protection. I agreed, and we met at an out-of-the-way Chinese restaurant.
Aistova and her brother made an unusual pair. She was a short young woman with midlength brown hair, dressed all in black: sweater, leggings, big wedge boots. She insisted on paying for my coffee. “You are a Russian guest,” she said. He, by contrast, was a hulking skinhead with arms full of Nazi-themed tattoos, most prominent among them a five-inch swastika on his left biceps. “My brother, he looks like a strongman,” Aistova said, giggling. He wore a black T-shirt emblazoned with the skull-and-crossbones insignia of the SS Totenkopf division, which administered the Nazi concentration camps. I asked him what his T-shirt meant. “Totenkopf,” he grunted. During the interview he sat across the table from Aistova and me, smiling silently behind his sunglasses.
Aistova said that she worked for the Internet Research Agency for a month and a half. The majority of her work was translating news articles from English to Russian. The news articles covered everything from Ukraine to traffic accidents. On a few occasions, her bosses asked her to leave comments on American news sites about Russia, but she said that they never told her what to say. She loves Russia, she told me. She truly believes that Putin is just trying to help the people of Eastern Ukraine, and that his actions are being unfairly spun by the Western media. “I was like, Hey, you guys, you are saying these bad things about Putin, but people are suffering.”
But she claimed to harbor no ill will toward the United States. She wants to visit New York City, she said, and see the locations from “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” one of her favorite films. “I don’t feel aggressive toward America. We’re the same people, we just speak different languages,” she said. After the interview, we shook hands outside the restaurant. “You seem like a journalist who will tell the truth,” she said. “I wish you luck on your story.”
On my last morning in St. Petersburg, I returned to 55 Savushkina. The clouds had lifted after a miserable week of snow and howling wind. At a few minutes before 10, my translator and I positioned ourselves on the sidewalk in front of the entrance, hoping to catch some of the trolls as they began the day shift. This was not a very well thought out strategy. Any employees arriving so close to the start of their shift didn’t have time to talk to a journalist even if they wanted to. A large van lurched to a halt in front of us and deposited a half-dozen young people, who hurried in the door before we had the chance to approach them. A bus stopped halfway down the block, and another gaggle of workers emerged. They waved off my translator’s inquiries with annoyed grunts or stone-faced silence. A young man smoking a cigarette said he didn’t work inside the building. He finished his cigarette and promptly went inside the building.
At 10 a.m. sharp, the flow of workers stopped. I decided we might as well try walking inside. I had read of other journalists who tried to enter the building, only to be kicked out immediately, so I entered with some trepidation. Two men in suits guarded the turnstiles. My translator and I approached a receptionist behind a desk and asked if we could speak with someone from Internet Research. (It dropped the “Agency” on moving to 55 Savushkina.) She informed us that Internet Research was no longer a tenant. “A couple of months ago, we had to say goodbye, because it was giving the entire building a bad reputation,” she said, matter-of-factly.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
She pointed to a board that displayed a makeshift directory of the building’s current occupants. The names were printed out on small scraps of paper, and none of them were Internet Research. But I did recognize one: “FAN,” or Federal News Agency. I had read some news articles claiming that FAN was part of a network of pro-Kremlin news sites run out of 55 Savushkina, also funded by Evgeny Prigozhin. Former Internet Research Agency employees I had spoken to said they believed FAN was another wing of the same operation, under a different name. I asked to speak to someone from FAN. To my surprise, the receptionist picked up the phone, spoke into it for a few seconds and then informed us that Evgeny Zubarev, the editor in chief of FAN, would be right out to meet us.
Zubarev, who looked to be in his 50s, had close-cropped salt-and-pepper hair and a weary face. He greeted me with a handshake and invited me into his office. We made our way through the turnstiles and signed in with the guards, then took a brief walk down a long hallway to FAN’s two-room office on the first floor. It was unusually quiet for an online news operation that, according to Zubarev, had a staff of 40 people. The newsroom was equipped for a sizable team, with about a dozen identical black desktop computers sitting on identical brown laminate desks, but only two young reporters sat at them. The shades were drawn and the furniture looked just barely unpacked.
As we sat at Zubarev’s desk, I told him about the articles I’d read accusing FAN of being a Kremlin propaganda outfit. He shook his head in indignation. He turned to his computer and brought up FAN’s website, pointing to the masthead and the certificate number that showed FAN was an officially registered Russian mass-media organization. “FAN is a news agency,” he declared. It had stringers and reporters in Ukraine, and in many former Soviet states; they did original reporting, sometimes at great personal risk. Zubarev himself was a veteran journalist who covered the annexation of Crimea for the Russian news agency Rosbalt before joining FAN. But ever since reports linked him to the Internet Research Agency, he had faced questions about his integrity.
“We understand being in this building may discredit us, but we can’t afford to move at the moment,” Zubarev said with a sigh. “So we have to face the situation where reporters like you, Mr. Chen, come in here and ask us questions every day.”
Zubarev said he believed that he and FAN were victims of a smear campaign. I asked him who would do such a thing.
“Listen, that’s my position, not a confirmed fact,” he said. “It’s possible that there are some business interests, I don’t know. Maybe it’s an attack on our investors.” But when I asked who those investors were, he declined to comment. “I can’t discuss the identities of investors,” he said. “That’s in my contract.”
I left St. Petersburg on April 28. One day later, FAN published an article with the headline “What Does a New York Times Journalist Have in Common With a Nazi From St. Petersburg?” The story detailed a mysterious meeting in St. Petersburg between a New York Times journalist — me — and a neo-Nazi. Its lead image was a photo of a skinhead giving an enthusiastic Nazi salute. But it was not just any skinhead. It was the skinhead whom Katarina Aistova brought to our meeting and introduced to me as her brother. As I learned from reading the article, Aistova’s “brother” was in fact a notorious neo-Nazi named Alexei Maximov.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The article explained that Maximov, who goes by the nickname Fly, is a member of Totenkopf, a prominent skinhead group in St. Petersburg. He reportedly served nine years in prison for stabbing a man to death. Just a month before I met him, Maximov again made headlines when, during an investigation into beatings of immigrants around St. Petersburg, the police found weaponry and Nazi paraphernalia in his apartment.
The story made no mention of Katarina Aistova or the Internet Research Agency. Instead, the article claimed I met with Maximov because I wanted his help in creating a provocation against Russia. Maximov told FAN that I requested to meet him because I was “very keenly interested in sentiment among Russian nationalists.” He continued: “He evidently needed stories about how the murderous Kremlin regime persecutes free Russian people. It’s not the first time I’ve come across such requests on the part of Western journalists, but I’m not going to help them with this. Many want to see in Russian nationalists a ‘fifth column,’ which will function on orders from the West and sweep away the Kremlin.” Apparently I was trying to foment a mini-Euromaidan, right there in St. Petersburg.
The article was illustrated with photos of my meeting with Aistova and Maximov. One photo appears to have been shot surreptitiously through the restaurant window while we sat and talked. The point of view is such that Aistova is barely visible; indeed, at first glance, I seem to be having a friendly chat with a skinhead over a cup of coffee. Another photo, this one taken outside the restaurant, somehow makes me look deep in conversation with Maximov, even though I distinctly recall that Aistova was standing between us.
I had to admire the brazenness of the scheme. I remembered how, at the restaurant, Aistova had sat next to me so I had to twist around to talk to her, while Maximov sat silently across from us. Apparently they had arranged themselves so it could appear, from the right perspective, that I was meeting Maximov alone. I emailed Aistova to ask her to explain what happened. She responded only: “I would also like you to explain yourself and the situation!!” (A few weeks later, when I tried calling her by phone, she pretended I had the wrong number.)
Over the course of a few days, the sensational story circulated among a network of small pro-Kremlin blogs. In fact, the FAN story itself had been aggregated from another pro-Kremlin news site called People’s News, which Andrei Soshnikov, the Moi Raion journalist, has reported also operates out of 55 Savushkina. As it spread, it mutated to become even more alarming. One website suggested I was working for the C.I.A.; another, the National Security Agency. A YouTube channel called Russia Today — not the well-known state television channel but a knockoff — posted a slick video about the meeting, set to a pounding dubstep soundtrack. Disconcertingly, it included a photo of me leaving my hotel. The video currently has more than 60,000 views. Many of those views were a result of a familiar pattern of social-media promotion: Dozens of trolls on Twitter began tweeting links to the video using the hashtag #ВербовкаНацистов — “Recruitment of Nazis.” The hashtag trended on Russian Twitter.
After recovering from the initial shock, I began to track the campaign against me. I had practice, after all, from my months spent on the trail of the Internet Research Agency. I Googled the various Russian spellings of my name every hour to catch the latest posts as soon as they surfaced on LiveJournal and VKontakte. I searched Twitter for the URL of the YouTube video to catch every post.
A few days later, Soshnikov chatted with me on Skype. “Did you see an article about you on FAN?” he asked. “They know you are going to publish a loud article, so they are trying to make you look stupid in front of the Russian audience.”
I explained the setup, and as I did I began to feel a nagging paranoia. The more I explained, the more absurd my own words seemed — the more they seemed like exactly the sort of elaborate alibi a C.I.A. agent might concoct once his cover was blown. The trolls had done the only thing they knew how to do, but this time they had done it well. They had gotten into my head.
Correction: June 21, 2015
An article on June 7 about Russian Internet ‘‘trolls’’ referred incorrectly to the Internet platform Yandex. It was subjected to political pressure, but it was not brought under the control of Kremlin allies.
Field kitchens and white stakes - are proof it's Russia? Haha
Russia don't use "Rapira" cannons. It's obsolete.
T-72 not just Russian. Ukraine used them against militia, so it may be captured. For example, in Debaltsevo.
There is no point to "invade" Ukraine with 4 tanks, Isn't it?
No proof.
There is no Russian troops. Only Ukraine nazis and americans killing civilians and militia.
Mercenaries in Mariupol after bombing by ukrainian army
unknown american, captured in Kharkov by enraged locals after he shot civilians
upd: I'm not sure information is correct. Different sources give different details. But he shot someone and location is Kharkov.
"Constructive discussion" you mean - is to blame Putin for everything?
Is it so interesting to hear same brainwashing every day? Let's try another bra... I mean truth.
Freakazoitt wrote: Field kitchens and white stakes - are proof it's Russia? Haha
Russia don't use "Rapira" cannons. It's obsolete.
T-72 not just Russian. Ukraine used them against militia, so it may be captured. For example, in Debaltsevo.
There is no point to "invade" Ukraine with 4 tanks, Isn't it?
No proof.
There is no Russian troops. Only Ukraine nazis and americans killing civilians and militia.
Mercenaries in Mariupol after bombing by ukrainian army
unknown american, captured in Kharkov by enraged locals after he shot civilians
upd: I'm not sure information is correct. Different sources give different details. But he shot someone and location is Kharkov.
Captured by DNR american
It's U.S. agression against Ukraine
Jesus the last two of those videos are just prisoners being abused, what on earth are they supposed to prove other than they're being abused?
If they really caught Americans, especially actual US military personnel, that would have been seized upon a whole lot more than bad cell phone camera footage of prisoners getting beaten.
The first one has some guy say someone say something something in English with literally zero context and that's about it. Hardly exactly great evidence.
Vice News however did have a great documentary about an American fighting *WITH* the DNR guys.
Freakazoitt wrote: I don't know details. It,s just uploaded. I hope, there there will be some clues in comments later.
You'll understand if that's not exactly inspiring evidence.
About second video - ask ukraines. Kharkov was always been under "government" control.
Who knows where it was taken or what it's of, there's zero context or information in the video, all we can see is some dude getting beaten up. It doesn't tell us anything. It could be in Donetsk, Luhansk, Debaltseve, or somewhere else entirely for all we know from what the video shows.
The only thing that indicated anything about Americans is simply the video title, which can be entirely made up.
There was AFAIK, one American fighting on the Ukrainian side, and old man who volunteered, and he's dead. AFAIK there's one fighting with the DNR.
There is no Russian troops. Only Ukraine nazis and americans killing civilians and militia.
T-72B's, sure, you'd have a point. but we've been seeing T-72BM, which was not a variant that Russia typically exports. Further Relikt looks different than Kontact-5 or Nozh, meaning these are Russian military T-72BMs. The official story is, though, that they're on vacation from their units.
How they were allowed to take their tanks with them on vacation in the Ukraine is a question that has never really been answered.
Vaktathi wrote:K, one American fighting on the Ukrainian side, and old man who volunteered, and he's dead. AFAIK there's one fighting with the DNR.
Not just one. Some ex-backwaters group there.
And USA sent instructors to train UAF. It was published in US, Ukraine and Russian news.
BaronIveagh wrote:T-72B's, sure, you'd have a point. but we've been seeing T-72BM, which was not a variant that Russia typically exports. Further Relikt looks different than Kontact-5 or Nozh, meaning these are Russian military T-72BMs. The official story is, though, that they're on vacation from their units.
How they were allowed to take their tanks with them on vacation in the Ukraine is a question that has never really been answered.
Vaktathi wrote:K, one American fighting on the Ukrainian side, and old man who volunteered, and he's dead. AFAIK there's one fighting with the DNR.
Not just one. Some ex-backwaters group there.
Any source on that?
Even if they were there, they're mercenaries fighting for a paycheck, and there's very definitely such groups on both sides currently.
And USA sent instructors to train UAF. It was published in US, Ukraine and Russian news.
Yes, there's about 200 US troops engaged in training exercises in Kiev, but they're not a combat group anywhere near the front lines, and their whereabouts are rather well known. They're not out there engaging in combat, they're not providing direct battle assistance, basically they're trying (who knows how successfully) to show the Ukrainians how to get their heads out of their asses. Nobody has been trying to hide that, but they're not a major military asset, aren't engaged in active fighting, and are hundreds of kilometers from the actual fighting. They're a token show of support so that the US can say it's doing something without actually really doing anything.
And USA sent instructors to train UAF. It was published in US, Ukraine and Russian news.
Yes, there's about 200 US troops engaged in training exercises in Kiev, but they're not a combat group anywhere near the front lines, and their whereabouts are rather well known. They're not out there engaging in combat, they're not providing direct battle assistance, basically they're trying (who knows how successfully) to show the Ukrainians how to get their heads out of their asses. Nobody has been trying to hide that, but they're not a major military asset, aren't engaged in active fighting, and are hundreds of kilometers from the actual fighting. They're a token show of support so that the US can say it's doing something without actually really doing anything.
What's the point to train them how to kill civilians?
Why not to concentrate on peaceful solution?
DNR militia just defending civilians from genocide. Unfortunately, UAF and Praviy Sector can use artillery to randomly bomb city. They don't even targeting at DNR militia positions.
Stopping these chaotic artillery - first step for peace
You'll excuse me if I don't count some random dude's personal website as a reliable source, especially relying on things like "oh man there's a $100 bill in the window...they must be foreign troops!", notwithstanding that the US $100 bill is the most widely used and counterfeited note in the world, with significant usage in pop culture as a symbol in and of itself...
Are there random volunteers from various nations on both sides? Absolutely. We've seen American volunteers on both sides. We've seen Scandanavians and others in the Azov battallion and others. We've see Serbians and Chechens fighting in the ranks of the Separatists. Are there large, organized groups of Western mercenaries fighting over there? Don't see any evidence of that.
And USA sent instructors to train UAF. It was published in US, Ukraine and Russian news.
Yes, there's about 200 US troops engaged in training exercises in Kiev, but they're not a combat group anywhere near the front lines, and their whereabouts are rather well known. They're not out there engaging in combat, they're not providing direct battle assistance, basically they're trying (who knows how successfully) to show the Ukrainians how to get their heads out of their asses. Nobody has been trying to hide that, but they're not a major military asset, aren't engaged in active fighting, and are hundreds of kilometers from the actual fighting. They're a token show of support so that the US can say it's doing something without actually really doing anything.
Are we going to pretend that the separatist factions aren't just as responsible for civilian casualties with similar reckless use of area weapons and artillery? Civilians die in war, that's a simple reality. When people decide to go to war, innocent people are going to get in the way. And it's ugly, and it's especially going to happen when rebellions are staged in cities, there's more people to get in the way.
But acting as if one side is actively intending to kill civilians, and that only one side is responsible for anything, or that the casualties are one-sided, is beyond absurd here.
If you're just going to resort to ridiculous appeals to emotion like this, and suggest that any US forces or anyone else there are there to train them to engage in this sort of act, you're never going to have a conversation, you're just parroting propaganda.
I would highly suggest watching Vice's series on the conflict. They're pretty good about getting both sides views, they cover when civilians are killed on both sides, they talk to both the Separatists and Ukrainians, as well as the people in the middle, and they call bs on both sides. They've got what is almost certainly the most complete, balanced, and in depth coverage of the conflict, and have been in there reporting since the since everything began in 2013.
You, mean, Donetsk made artillery bombardment on Donetsk? Absurd
Not so absurd when they're engaging Ukrainian forces with weapons that are either inherently inaccurate or lack the capability to use them accurately. It's not hard for an artillery unit to overshoot or undershoot its target by hundreds or even thousands of meters if the gunners aren't properly trained or just don't care and are shooting just to shoot (very common in battle). Never automatically attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.
DNR militia just defending civilians from genocide. Unfortunately, UAF and Praviy Sector can use artillery to randomly bomb city. They don't even targeting at DNR militia positions.
Stopping these chaotic artillery - first step for peace
You're assuming these weapons are accurate enough to be properly targeted, that the crews are well trained and know what they're doing, and that the DNR aren't possibly fighting from civilian positions, none of which may be true. Again, never automatically attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.
Lets also not forget that the Separatists shell Ukrainian positions and civilian dwellings on the other side of the line with just as much chaos. They're not innocent of anything themselves...
Are there random volunteers from various nations on both sides? Absolutely. We've seen American volunteers on both sides. We've seen Scandanavians and others in the Azov battallion and others. We've see Serbians and Chechens fighting in the ranks of the Separatists. Are there large, organized groups of Western mercenaries fighting over there? Don't see any evidence of that.
So why you don't call it "American invasion", "Sweden invasion", "Serbian invasion"?
Vaktathi wrote: Are we going to pretend that the separatist factions aren't just as responsible for civilian casualties with similar reckless use of area weapons and artillery? Civilians die in war, that's a simple reality. When people decide to go to war, innocent people are going to get in the way. And it's ugly, and it's especially going to happen when rebellions are staged in cities, there's more people to get in the way.
Because they have different goals. Ukraine radicals orders army to kill eastern ukrainians and destroy infrastructure. They call them "colorados", "colorados should be burned". They hate them and want thier death. So, they don't bother targeting at militia. Civilians for them good target too.
DNR militia use artillery only to silent these murdering bombardment and to blow up UAF positions. Militia crew expirienced enough to use cannon propertly and they know exactly what they shooting at.
For exampleAnd onother
Are there random volunteers from various nations on both sides? Absolutely. We've seen American volunteers on both sides. We've seen Scandanavians and others in the Azov battallion and others. We've see Serbians and Chechens fighting in the ranks of the Separatists. Are there large, organized groups of Western mercenaries fighting over there? Don't see any evidence of that.
So why you don't call it "American invasion", "Sweden invasion", "Serbian invasion"?
...Because the Swedes didn't literally invade the country like the Russians? o.O
Dammit, must resist making counter points to trolls.
In the mind of the propaganda spouters here's what the technology that the Russians are giving the separatists looks like.
Where on earth did he find that matching Soviet era camo bandanna from...?
Are there random volunteers from various nations on both sides? Absolutely. We've seen American volunteers on both sides. We've seen Scandanavians and others in the Azov battallion and others. We've see Serbians and Chechens fighting in the ranks of the Separatists. Are there large, organized groups of Western mercenaries fighting over there? Don't see any evidence of that.
So why you don't call it "American invasion", "Sweden invasion", "Serbian invasion"?
Because there's exceedingly few of them and there's no indication that they're really acting in any organized manner.
Because they have different goals. Ukraine radicals orders army to kill eastern ukrainians and destroy infrastructure. They call them "colorados", "colorados should be burned". They hate them and want thier death. So, they don't bother targeting at militia. Civilians for them good target too.
DNR militia use artillery only to silent these murdering bombardment and to blow up UAF positions. Militia crew expirienced enough to use cannon propertly and they know exactly what they shooting at.
Yes, because real war is so one-dimensional...
There are people on both sides that hate each other. If you honestly think the conflict is that one sided, that the Ukrainians just absolutely hate the people of the Donbas and want them all dead, and that the Separatists are all well trained heroes acting only in defense with excellent targeting abilities, you're delusional or you've drunk the cool-aid. Simple as. Most of them don't have any training at all, and especially not as trained artillery operators. Again, I would highly encourage you to watch Vice's coverage. They really are very good. They get in and talk with just about every party involved, including quite a bit with the DNR guys and they're not hesitant to show the results of either sides artillery attacks and the results of civilians, even DNR controlled areas. EDIT: in fact Vice's latest video (here) is simply talking with pro-russian fighters and checking out their living quarters and one of they guys they were talking with gets killed.
Yes, grainy cell phone video of random stuff with zero context and matrix animations in the background are excellent sources... they don't really tell us anything.
There are people on both sides that hate each other.
In the west they hate, because of 20 years of nazi brainwashing. They hate Russia, USSR, Stalin, tsar, bolsheviks - just like you In the east they hate ukraine govermnent, because government is killing them, They just want to be alive.
Separatists are all well trained heroes acting only in defense with excellent targeting abilities, you're delusional or you've drunk the cool-aid.
I think, americans very like separatists, fighting against crazy opressors (Ghadaffi, Saddam, Al-Assad) and making for them heroic aura. But you supporting real terrorist. ISIL came from Iraq, "liberated from dictatorship". And Al-Assad is fighting against real terrorist, who beheading americans on camera. Why USA don't support him, instead of helping terrorists? because US want chaos all over the world? If so, reason of chaos in Ukraine in their "government", because USA support it. Do you know, that UAF soldiers being executed for refusing to kill civilians? It's not "innacurate fire", when cvilians being killed. It's because civilans - are target. That's the reason, why ceasing fire in only solution for now. But Ukraine "government" don't want to stop it.
Vice's coverage.
I started to watch this. First exression is videos are neutral, so might be interesting. But it's suspitious why it called "Russian roulette".
I haven't read any of this after the first couple pages and then ran into the last page. you have 1-2 people from Russia actively defending the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They do So by citing credible sources such as
Email From US Special Forces Veteran; 500 US Blackwater Mercenaries in Ukraine? US Backs Ukrainian Neo-Nazis. From some random Russian guys personal website.
You then have a plethora of people from several different countries citing credible sources and news outlets and none of which apparently sinks into the heads of the 1-2 people who actually believe this is a Separatist movement and not a russian invasion.
To all the Russian supporters (all 2 of you) why is it that the entirety of Europe thinks this is a Russian invasion? hell, why does the entire world think this is a Russian invasion? the only country that really believes this isn't a Russian invasion is Russia, and even then its a stretch, you have Soldiers in your military deserting every day to keep from being deployed to Ukraine.
Russia refuses to obey them, That's why USA hate Russia.
Your right, the CIA controls the entire world. And Russia the brave, heroic country they are have fought the entire world for years now and won.....yeah
Russia refuses to obey them, That's why USA hate Russia.
Well, to be honest, I don't hate Russia. I just don't like Putin's foreign policies where you invade other countries to 'liberate' them, and keep them 'liberated' at gun point.
You talk about the CIA controlling the world. While I can name a few South American nations that do bend a knee to the Company, I highly doubt that China, as an example, is so in bed with the CIA that they're telling people it's a Russian invasion.
No one is claiming that Russia is not involved at this point but Russians. And not even all of them, to read Russian newspapers interviewing wounded Russian soldiers.
Originally maybe, but if it is currently, it's a museum piece. The Russians have not used that style reactive armor for their own use for a long time, and the 1K13 sight partially visible behind the guy's head makes it obsolete.
And, two hours? really? If they are, that's one fast team. First they have to steal all the parts, since Russia does not currently sell them (that I know of).
But let's say they have them all. You have to replace the engine and transmission, swap in and out the targeting system, and apply either Kontakt-5 or Relict. Whole thing though would take about a day and some fairly specialized tools, since Russia had to send them back to the factory to do it.
And while on the subject of the T-72BM...
At first glance, there's not much difference between it and more recent export T-72s, as the missing search light by the barrel might have just been torn away and Kontakt reactive armor are pretty universal at this point, save on newer BMs (T-72B3). The 125 mm 2A46 main gun is pretty common, though it 'might' be a 2A46M-5.
However, You may notice that little box on the turret between the smoke launchers and the open hatch. That's it's sights, and it's Sosna-U, and it's a signature of recent Russian tanks, or, at least, recently Russian tanks. This combined with the Kontakt-5 marks it as a T-72BM (or T-72B2 at least.) She's missing a sensor mast behind the Sosna-U, but it may have been removed or torn off.
Well, to be honest, I don't hate Russia. I just don't like Putin's foreign policies where you invade other countries to 'liberate' them, and keep them 'liberated' at gun point.
I don't hate USA too. But I don't like their imperialistic politics of bombing countries, assasinating leaders, turning it into chaos. Especially after disbanding of USSR. Instead of calming, USA continued to make wars. If Putin's rogeign policy is bad for you, them american foreign policy should be totally weird and evil for you.
BaronIveagh wrote: You talk about the CIA controlling the world. While I can name a few South American nations that do bend a knee to the Company, I highly doubt that China, as an example, is so in bed with the CIA that they're telling people it's a Russian invasion.
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru. All of these are considered by CIA as an "evil rogue states, to be eliminated". Very agressive position, making them to control entire Earth ball. Ukraine chaos is just enticement for Russia. CIA very much want that Russia attacked it. But Russia it isn't going on that bait. What will be next? CIA will order ukrainians to attack Russia? Or they will try to make maidan in Belarus, Kazakhstan? Or directly in Moskow?
Originally maybe, but if it is currently, it's a museum piece. The Russians have not used that style reactive armor for their own use for a long time, and the 1K13 sight partially visible behind the guy's head makes it obsolete.
Looks like it's Poroshenko himself. About tank - it's 72 with early reactive armour. in Ukraine there were ~800 T-72 of many modifications. They didn't used them before 2014, but if they use this kind of armour:
they probably used T-72 too.
At least 3 captured by DNR T-72 are confirmed.
And, two hours? really? If they are, that's one fast team. First they have to steal all the parts, since Russia does not currently sell them (that I know of).
I don't know about wind detector, targeters and other systems, but replacing old style reactive armour with Kontakt-5 ones - not a difficult task and can be done in field conditions. Some equipment may be stolen from Russia.
At first glance, there's not much difference between it and more recent export T-72s, as the missing search light by the barrel might have just been torn away and Kontakt reactive armor are pretty universal at this point, save on newer BMs (T-72B3). The 125 mm 2A46 main gun is pretty common, though it 'might' be a 2A46M-5.
However, You may notice that little box on the turret between the smoke launchers and the open hatch. That's it's sights, and it's Sosna-U, and it's a signature of recent Russian tanks, or, at least, recently Russian tanks. This combined with the Kontakt-5 marks it as a T-72BM (or T-72B2 at least.) She's missing a sensor mast behind the Sosna-U, but it may have been removed or torn off.
This particular unit was captured in the Ukraine.
I want to see your picture, but it not opening in my browser
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru. All of these are considered by CIA as an "evil rogue states, to be eliminated". Very agressive position, making them to control entire Earth ball. Ukraine chaos is just enticement for Russia. CIA very much want that Russia attacked it. But Russia it isn't going on that bait. What will be next? CIA will order Ukrainians to attack Russia? Or they will try to make maidan in Belarus, Kazakhstan? Or directly in Moskow?
My point being that all of them but Russia and Syria have admitted that, yes, Russia is in the Ukraine. Even China at that point voted in favor of a UN resolution against Russia for it. Hell, even Iron Captain admitted that there is Russian involvement in the Ukraine, though to what degree is debatable.
I admit that I have a hard time picturing the CIA secretly running anything for very long. I mean, really, they couldn't keep their secret prisons secret. Or keep China from stealing the names and identities of 20 million US government employees.
I want to see your picture, but it not opening in my browser
I've noticed this with some Russian sites too, that things won't show/are not working correctly. Traced it back to something in Russia blocking parts of them, for some reason. It's weird though as it does not block the whole site, just parts of them.
I don't know about wind detector, targeters and other systems, but replacing old style reactive armour with Kontakt-5 ones - not a difficult task and can be done in field conditions. Some equipment may be stolen from Russia.
I'm again trying to picture escaping with enough stolen Russian hardware to make it worthwhile and not have the ensuing fight visible from orbit.
Again, you'd have ot steal it directly from Russia. This isn't something you can hit a depot for items being exported in meaningful amounts.
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru. All of these are considered by CIA as an "evil rogue states, to be eliminated". Very agressive position, making them to control entire Earth ball. Ukraine chaos is just enticement for Russia. CIA very much want that Russia attacked it. But Russia it isn't going on that bait. What will be next? CIA will order ukrainians to attack Russia? Or they will try to make maidan in Belarus, Kazakhstan? Or directly in Moskow?
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru. All of these are considered by CIA as an "evil rogue states, to be eliminated". Very agressive position, making them to control entire Earth ball. Ukraine chaos is just enticement for Russia. CIA very much want that Russia attacked it. But Russia it isn't going on that bait. What will be next? CIA will order ukrainians to attack Russia? Or they will try to make maidan in Belarus, Kazakhstan? Or directly in Moskow?
Bwahahahahahaha...
This is priceless if you actually believe that.
Come on man we all know its CIA>Reptilians>Grey men>Illuminati>Free masons running the world.
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru. All of these are considered by CIA as an "evil rogue states, to be eliminated". Very agressive position, making them to control entire Earth ball. Ukraine chaos is just enticement for Russia. CIA very much want that Russia attacked it. But Russia it isn't going on that bait. What will be next? CIA will order ukrainians to attack Russia? Or they will try to make maidan in Belarus, Kazakhstan? Or directly in Moskow?
Bwahahahahahaha...
This is priceless if you actually believe that.
Come on man we all know its CIA>Reptilians>Grey men>Illuminati>Free masons running the world.
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru. All of these are considered by CIA as an "evil rogue states, to be eliminated". Very agressive position, making them to control entire Earth ball. Ukraine chaos is just enticement for Russia. CIA very much want that Russia attacked it. But Russia it isn't going on that bait. What will be next? CIA will order ukrainians to attack Russia? Or they will try to make maidan in Belarus, Kazakhstan? Or directly in Moskow?
Bwahahahahahaha...
This is priceless if you actually believe that.
Come on man we all know its CIA>Reptilians>Grey men>Illuminati>Free masons running the world.
You forgot Jews.
Thats just how tricksy the Jews are, they dont even make the list.
There are people on both sides that hate each other.
In the west they hate, because of 20 years of nazi brainwashing.
Methinks you're vastly overestimating the effect any "Nazi's" have in Ukraine. There was never any murmerings of "Nazi's" until a year and a half ago when they all magically appeared.
Lets also not forget that Russia has one of the largest neo-nazi populations in the world. Hell, every nation in the world has its share of ultranationalist crazies. Assuming that they're in major power and leading national discourse however in Ukraine or anywhere else is a mistake. Do they have a voice? Certainly. Is that unique to Ukraine? No. Are they in control of the Ukrainian government? Hardly.
They hate Russia, USSR, Stalin, tsar, bolsheviks - just like you
Who said I hate Russia? I don't. I'm a fan of many Russians, like Leonid Kantorovich, Brusilov, Gagarin, Kalashnikov, etc. I just happen to think the Russian government is currently doing some rather stupid things. They're not the only ones, they just happen to be the subject of this thread.
I don't see why I'd have anything big beef with the Tsar. He's been dead for a century, and when he was in power, he was an ally of the US, France, and the UK.
But, sure, I can't say I'm a fan of Stalin, any more than I'm a fan of Pol Pot, Hitler, Mao, Saddam Hussein, or any other similar dictator. Or certain US presidents for that matter
In the east they hate ukraine govermnent, because government is killing them, They just want to be alive.
After they instigated an armed rebellion, professing a desire to join a state that had just seized another part of Ukraine (Crimea).
I think, americans very like separatists, fighting against crazy opressors (Ghadaffi, Saddam, Al-Assad) and making for them heroic aura. But you supporting real terrorist. ISIL came from Iraq, "liberated from dictatorship". And Al-Assad is fighting against real terrorist, who beheading americans on camera. Why USA don't support him, instead of helping terrorists? because US want chaos all over the world? If so, reason of chaos in Ukraine in their "government", because USA support it.
Yes the US has done some absolutely stupid things. We're very good at doing stupid things sometimes. Often times the US government does things without any concept of the consequences or any long term plan. Syria is an absolute disaster and US policy has undoubtedly been disastrous (though Assad isn't much better than anyone else there, he just doesn't release videos on the internet of his forces killing prisoners as opposed to the ISIL guys). As I said before though, attributing that to raw malice or some sort of desire to see chaos in the world, as opposed to stupidity, is a mistake. That said, those are topics for another thread.
Even the US however, with well trained troops and excellent targeting equipment and hundreds of times the funding of either Ukraine or the DNR rebels, has had issues with munitions not going where intended or hitting targets that were not what what we thought they were.
One must also remember that the groups fighting against Ukraine aren't an organized whole, they're a collection of various groups that don't all work together. Some are very well armed and organized, others are just groups of dudes that obtained guns and do their own thing with the orange ribbon on their shirt. The guys grabbing old T-34's off of monuments are not the same guys who took Debaltseve.
Do you know, that UAF soldiers being executed for refusing to kill civilians?
Do you have a source on that? I haven't seen anything on Ukrainian soldiers being executed by their own side for *anything*.
It's not "innacurate fire", when cvilians being killed. It's because civilans - are target. That's the reason, why ceasing fire in only solution for now. But Ukraine "government" don't want to stop it.
It's difficult to believe that this conflict continues simply because the Ukrainian government wants to kill the people of the Donbas. They can't find their ass with both hands, they're so divided internally and riddled with corruption that they barely function, yet they are united enough to continue a costly war they obviously can't prosecute properly nor afford the cost of, just because they want to kill the people of the Donbas that bad?
If they had that sort of force of will, unity of command, and capability, things would likely be very different.
I started to watch this. First exression is videos are neutral, so might be interesting. But it's suspitious why it called "Russian roulette".
It's a double reference to the decidedly lethal game "Russian Roulette", where one never knows the consequences of a trigger pull, and the fact that there's Russians involved (even if they're not Russian troops, the DNR rebels and the like all claim to be Russsian).
Russia refuses to obey them, That's why USA hate Russia.
Methinks you're attributing a magical power to the CIA that doesn't exist. The CIA can't keep a secret for squat, as others have already noted, and have botched more operations than most people can count.
If the CIA had the sort of power you attribute to it, Russia refusing to "obey" them would be of little consequence, and in fact if they had that sort of power, Russia likely wouldn't know who not to obey
Therea few countries left, not controlled by CIA. Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Syria, probably Peru.
As someone who really doesn't like the CIA and would like to see them just go away (mostly because they absolutely suck at what they do... I mean most of the 20th century is a giant testament to the CIA's complete and utter failure to actually achieve results worth their budget and cost of life), gotta say; I want what you're smoking.
What is funny is if you read up on the Venona project and what the Russians let out of their archives before they realized what was getting out and re-shut them, you realize just how much the KGB and their ilk had infiltrated the western countries and set up into areas where the influence is still felt. And even with the hard proof from what has been declassified and what came out of their own archives, folks like Freakazoitt will tell us it never happened and the CIA runs the world.
Pretty amazing actually.
I actually feel bad for folks like that who cannot grasp reality or can but choose to ignore it and stay in their comfort zone.
Well to be fair, the CIA probably did a lot of the same things during the Cold War, planting agents all over the Soviet Bloc.
But only a fool would legitimately believe either organization actually 'controlled' the world. The KGB and CIA are equally incompetent. Hell the CIA may even be more incompetent. The KGB actually managed to prop up a couple failing governments for more than a decade
Well, I suspect KGB infiltrations of, for example, unions and higher education has had a longer effect on us than anything the CIA did in Russia. They purposely played a long game, well beyond what we were doing.
CptJake wrote: Well, I suspect KGB infiltrations of, for example, unions and higher education has had a longer effect on us than anything the CIA did in Russia. They purposely played a long game, well beyond what we were doing.
This applies to some Western politicians too. Off the top of my head, Harriet Harman (UK) was a member of CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament), which is/was accused of links to communism and the KGB.
CptJake wrote: Well, I suspect KGB infiltrations of, for example, unions and higher education has had a longer effect on us than anything the CIA did in Russia. They purposely played a long game, well beyond what we were doing.
The CIAs ongoing impact is in South America and South East Asia.
To this day I wonder about that jailbreak in Thailand that was funded by the Nugan Hand Bank. I think it was about getting an 'in' with a large scale weapons operation. The company likes to infiltrate large criminal operations. Drugs guns and money is practically a motto.
No, what's going on in the Ukraine isn't their style. It's very KGB though. Start a violent insurrection someplace and supply it with all the guns they can do? Sounds like half their ops in South America.
I'm getting fed up of reading that anti-Russian attitudes are due to 'nazi propaganda', especially coming from people not even born until after the collapse of the Soviet Union so have a world view based on what is spooned to them by the Russian state in what passes for education and media. It would be nice to have a serious thread about Ukraine without crackpot claims about the CIA controlling the world with only Russia bravely standing up to them.
Went to the Stazi museum in Berlin yesterday and it was quite shocking the scale of the spying and nasty methods used to keep the population in line. Clearly the form of governing the Soviet Union approved of and consequently no wonder that returning under control by Russia is not popular with many Eastern European countries.
already. This guy needs to read a book. 
