Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That reads very much like a pro-Russian propaganda piece. Really what's happening is the Ukrainian state is no match for Russian units and equipment. I read in a gun magazine that the Ukrainian forces don't have optics on their AK-74Ms don't have optics, while the rebels and Russians do.

It's a shame NATO is afraid of Putin, otherwise we'd have sent equipment of our own. I doubt playing his game of "proxy war" would escalate to MAD.

I wouldn't be surprised. The state of the Ukrainian Army was extremely bad even before the crisis. Now that almost half the Army went to the seperatist side they had to fill up those losses with untrained (and mostly unmotivated) conscripts.
It has been reported several that the government had trouble feeding its troops, much less paying them.
The Ukrainian government mostly relies on fanatical volunteer militias of radical nationalists such as the Azov Batallion to do the fighting.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised. The state of the Ukrainian Army was extremely bad even before the crisis. Now that almost half the Army went to the seperatist side they had to fill up those losses with untrained (and mostly unmotivated) conscripts.
It has been reported several that the government had trouble feeding its troops, much less paying them.
The Ukrainian government mostly relies on fanatical volunteer militias of radical nationalists such as the Azov Batallion to do the fighting.

" The price of the warfare resumed by President Petro Poroshhenko in the east is terrifying. The hacked documents claim at least 1,100 servicemen of the Ukrainian army have lost their lives over the period of the last two weeks. Many dozens Ukrainian soldiers gave up to separatist forces. Ukrainian army has lost over 100 tanks and the armored vehicles."

This information comes into collision with the latest reports by Kiev generals about “no losses”, “defeated enemy” and “thousands of eliminated terrorists”.

The explanation to this is simple: according to the documents allegedly hacked, Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) has officially forbidden the Defense Ministry to reveal true casualties among servicemen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Airman wrote:

It's a shame NATO is afraid of Putin, otherwise we'd have sent equipment of our own. I doubt playing his game of "proxy war" would escalate to MAD.

Your best staying out of it. Let the CIA's choirboys do it, They're probably paid enough for it/

 loki old fart wrote:

Leaked document. Image from http://www.cyber-berkut.org/

Loki, 'hacktavists' don't usually work directly for the state. As has been pointed out in the past, Cyber-Berkut take their orders from SVR, and are also behind several attempts at Election rigging in the Ukraine. That they might, say, fabricate 'proof' of the Russian state media's claims doesn't seem too far fetched to me.

According to various experts trotted out by TASS over the last few months, the Ukrainian losses are huge.. If you actually add them up, the Ukrainians have lost four times the population of the entire Donbass region. Surly a sign of NATO intervention.

As anyone who has ever seen, heard of, or read about war will tell you, don't believe what you hear when people talk about casualties until after the treaty is signed, and then only half of it. After all, the Russians still don't know how many people they actually lost in WW2.

 loki old fart wrote:

" The price of the warfare resumed by President Petro Poroshhenko in the east is terrifying. The hacked documents claim at least 1,100 servicemen of the Ukrainian army have lost their lives over the period of the last two weeks.

Jesus... if those documents are true... that is just an insane amount of losses considering the state of "modern" medicine (even if they're not up to US/UK type standards, they're still a sight better than even the 80s)

I'm inclined to believe the losses are way overinflated to support the Russian cause. They also claimed America sent a decent supply of weapons over but failed to cite any sources on the matter (was relayed to me by a native Russian speaker who read the page in Russian. He shook his head and called them "bull**** liars".).

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 loki old fart wrote:

Leaked document. Image from http://www.cyber-berkut.org/

Loki, 'hacktavists' don't usually work directly for the state. As has been pointed out in the past, Cyber-Berkut take their orders from SVR, and are also behind several attempts at Election rigging in the Ukraine. That they might, say, fabricate 'proof' of the Russian state media's claims doesn't seem too far fetched to me.

And others say Cyber-Berkut is a branch of the FSB, or is made up of former members of the SBU. Who Cyber-Berkut are and who they work for is not known because the members are anonymous. All we know is that they are on the pro-Russian side, that they have published accurate sensitive information in the past, and have attacked several pro-Ukrainian sites and NATO.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
As anyone who has ever seen, heard of, or read about war will tell you, don't believe what you hear when people talk about casualties until after the treaty is signed, and then only half of it. After all, the Russians still don't know how many people they actually lost in WW2.

Agreed. Casualty estimates are always highly unreliable, especially for an ongoing conflict.
What is sure is that Ukraine is suffering quite a few losses. In the past few weeks alone there have been a lot of prisoners taken, more than before, and including quite a few high-ranking officers.

Over 1000 troops lost in 2 weeks does seem a bit extreme though, even considering the sad state of the Ukrainian military.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Who Cyber-Berkut are and who they work for is not known because the members are anonymous. All we know is that they are on the pro-Russian side, that they have published accurate sensitive information in the past, and have attacked several pro-Ukrainian sites and NATO.

Well, no, again, their information has been highly inaccurate in the past. Some of their supposed US documents have the sort of grammatical errors that suggest that they were written by a non-native speaker. Which makes them pretty suspect since I would hope that Jason P. Gresh
Lieutenant Colonel, US Army would have learned by now that "Your job is to cause some problems to the transport hubs in the south-east in order to frame-up the neighbor." isn't quite right, even when speaking in code. It sounds like he's a cover for Boris Badenov's latest plan to eliminate Moose and Squirrel.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Agreed. Casualty estimates are always highly unreliable, especially for an ongoing conflict.
What is sure is that Ukraine is suffering quite a few losses. In the past few weeks alone there have been a lot of prisoners taken, more than before, and including quite a few high-ranking officers.

According to some reports, mostly from Cargo 200, so grain of salt, the Russians have lost up to 6,200 men. Unfortunately, it's the only actual number I can find, and I consider it suspect. But assuming the Ukrainians really did lose 1k men, and the Russians were assaulting dug in positions, it's not outside the realm of possibility. The Ukrainians have had significant close air support, the 'rebels' have not really had much in that way.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Who Cyber-Berkut are and who they work for is not known because the members are anonymous. All we know is that they are on the pro-Russian side, that they have published accurate sensitive information in the past, and have attacked several pro-Ukrainian sites and NATO.

Well, no, again, their information has been highly inaccurate in the past. Some of their supposed US documents have the sort of grammatical errors that suggest that they were written by a non-native speaker. Which makes them pretty suspect since I would hope that Jason P. Gresh
Lieutenant Colonel, US Army would have learned by now that "Your job is to cause some problems to the transport hubs in the south-east in order to frame-up the neighbor." isn't quite right, even when speaking in code. It sounds like he's a cover for Boris Badenov's latest plan to eliminate Moose and Squirrel.

I did not say all of their information has been correct, only that some of it was.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Agreed. Casualty estimates are always highly unreliable, especially for an ongoing conflict.
What is sure is that Ukraine is suffering quite a few losses. In the past few weeks alone there have been a lot of prisoners taken, more than before, and including quite a few high-ranking officers.

According to some reports, mostly from Cargo 200, so grain of salt, the Russians have lost up to 6,200 men. Unfortunately, it's the only actual number I can find, and I consider it suspect. But assuming the Ukrainians really did lose 1k men, and the Russians were assaulting dug in positions, it's not outside the realm of possibility. The Ukrainians have had significant close air support, the 'rebels' have not really had much in that way.

Actually, Ukrainian air support is nonexistent and useless due to the shamelessly given G2A launchers that the rebels have. Still, the rebels and Russian news media like to flaunt Ukrainian casualties -- but I wonder how many rebels and Russian infantry were sent home in body bags?

It's never their own fault, it's the world's. That's how they (the Russians) see things. That or it's always America because we're always a convenient target by their media, especially outlets like Live NEws claiming Americans were behind the Parin shootings. But hey, that's what you get with state owned media: blatant lies and misinformation. Not to saw American news is any better, just that Russian media is typically up to no good.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
The Ukrainian Army also does not nearly get as much air support as they would want. The majority of their air force was not maintained and inoperable, and that was before the crisis began. Also, they are not Russian, they are pro-Russian. Most of them are Ukrainians.

It only takes a handful in the right place at the right time.

Further, Ukrainians don't get flown back to Russia as 'Cargo 200's. That's specifically reserved for dead Russian Military. (Wounded is 'Cargo 300'). According to sources inside Russia, over 6,200 Cargo 200's have landed in Russia since Mid January.

Either the Russian military is writing fake manifests to over-report it's casualties, or they're taking losses somewhere.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
The Ukrainian Army also does not nearly get as much air support as they would want. The majority of their air force was not maintained and inoperable, and that was before the crisis began. Also, they are not Russian, they are pro-Russian. Most of them are Ukrainians.

It only takes a handful in the right place at the right time.

Further, Ukrainians don't get flown back to Russia as 'Cargo 200's. That's specifically reserved for dead Russian Military. (Wounded is 'Cargo 300'). According to sources inside Russia, over 6,200 Cargo 200's have landed in Russia since Mid January.

Either the Russian military is writing fake manifests to over-report it's casualties, or they're taking losses somewhere.

That, or the mysterious source is simply not being truthful.
In any case there is no Russian military in Ukraine. Those body bags shipped back to Russia are volunteers and also some "volunteers". If there were a large Russian military presence in Donbass, things would look quite different there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Airman wrote:
It's never their own fault, it's the world's. That's how they (the Russians) see things. That or it's always America because we're always a convenient target by their media, especially outlets like Live NEws claiming Americans were behind the Parin shootings. But hey, that's what you get with state owned media: blatant lies and misinformation. Not to saw American news is any better, just that Russian media is typically up to no good.

From the Kremlin manual of emercencies:
Whenever something goes wrong it is the fault of:
(roll 1d6)
1. Fascists
2. Western Liberasts
3. America
4. Foreign spies
5. Chechen terrorists
6. All of the above (American fascist-liberast terrorist spies)

 Iron_Captain wrote:

In any case there is no Russian military in Ukraine.

This made me snigger. Of course there isn't....

Well they volunteered to join the Russian army, so that means that they volunteered when the government sent them to invade Ukraine right? Right!?

...Of course doesn't Russia still use conscription? Ah, tsk, then all those young men clearly just loved their country so much that they enlisted. Loved their country so much in fact that they lept at the chance to include even more people in it so that they could join them in all that loving.

...Naturally that being purely a love for once's country and in a totally not for each other in a non-heterosexual way.

...

Ah, but in all seriousness, there's no need for the Russians to send there entire army into the region given that its clear they've achieved their objectives with what's currently there. Obviously the exact number of troops is rather irrelevant if the debate's about whether the number reflects if we aught to know they're there given how blatant the Russians were at invading Ukraine in the first place. So the question aught not to be if there are Russian troops in Ukraine (that being ones sent there under orders from the government if we want to get into the whole "volunteering" silliness), rather it should be why are people dumb enough to still question that? I'd say its trolling at this stage to argue that point, then again that's the whole line of the Russian government ...though the Russians did find themselves being "banned" from a few international institutions so that may not be quite the point of contention. Like's been said before in this thread, it shows an ignorance of Soviet/Russian military tactics when it comes to invasions to believe that there isn't any troops in Ukraine.

Come to think of it, at least here in the UK, you're put on a terrorism watch list if you go and fight abroad in conflicts like Syria. I doubt that the Russians have been putting any of their own soldiers on a similar list, but imagine that they have one for those who have sided with the Ukrainians (or the Chechens/Georgians/etc). I wonder if they've been asked to produce any such documentation given that having young men going abroad to fight and coming back trained is something that the West at least seems to care so much about.

Though if they are volunteers, and they are full time soldiers, who's giving them permission to leave their service, or is the government find with a ton of troops going awol enmasse?

Ack, ok the level of doublespeak here's becoming a little heavy (reasons why I hate politics...), time to ditch this thread and nestle away in the hot chicks one for a while.

There's a hot chicks thread?

 Wyrmalla wrote:

Though if they are volunteers, and they are full time soldiers, who's giving them permission to leave their service, or is the government find with a ton of troops going awol enmasse?

Ack, ok the level of doublespeak here's becoming a little heavy (reasons why I hate politics...), time to ditch this thread and nestle away in the hot chicks one for a while.

What they are doing is that they give soldiers "official leave" for a few months so they can go to Ukraine as "volunteers" and train and help the seperatists.


As for the number of Russian "troops" in Ukraine, I think that is impossible to say, but I would estimate there are at least a few hundred. (with many more ex-military)

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
There's a hot chicks thread?

In the DCM forum

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Wyrmalla wrote:

Though if they are volunteers, and they are full time soldiers, who's giving them permission to leave their service, or is the government find with a ton of troops going awol enmasse?

Ack, ok the level of doublespeak here's becoming a little heavy (reasons why I hate politics...), time to ditch this thread and nestle away in the hot chicks one for a while.

What they are doing is that they give soldiers "official leave" for a few months so they can go to Ukraine as "volunteers" and train and help the seperatists.


As for the number of Russian "troops" in Ukraine, I think that is impossible to say, but I would estimate there are at least a few hundred. (with many more ex-military)

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
There's a hot chicks thread?

In the DCM forum

So that's what the extra $25 gets you...

Where else do you think BrookM's post count comes from?

Seems the man nominated for SecDef likes the idea of Arming the Ukrainians.




BMP variant? Looks a bit like a BMP-3 but it's hard to say.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Seems the man nominated for SecDef likes the idea of Arming the Ukrainians.

Oh please no, I hope not.

That's just going to feed the Russian propaganda machine. Ukraine isn't exactly lacking for arms, it was the dumping ground for the Warsaw Pact's legions as they returned from eastern Europe following the downfall of the USSR, at one point having ten rifles to each Ukrainian soldier. Unless all of it just got sold on the black market (which, a fair amount of it did).

And really, what they need more than arms, is technical and logistical support for the equipment they already have and are unable to effective deploy and use, along with training. Even more than that however, is a more functional and less corrupt government. Even if one wants to accept that the guys at the top are clean, the bureaucracy and middle level functionaries are absurdly rotten, something which contributed greatly to the downfall of the previous government and which continues to greatly hamper the current government.

Sending arms is just going to be wasted money and a propaganda coup for Putin methinks.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Sending arms is just going to be wasted money and a propaganda coup for Putin methinks.

Not so much. Putin's been screaming how the US has been sending guns and tanks and bombs and troops to back the Nazis for a few months now. Officially the US has been sending food and non lethal military gear. As opposed the highly lethal tanks and guns that Putin has been sending.

Yes, Putin has already called The Ukraine NATO's proxy army and everyone in Russia believes him so I don't see what difference it makes.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


BMP variant? Looks a bit like a BMP-3 but it's hard to say.

That is no BMP, it is a MT-LB
BMP-3:

MT-LB:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Yes, Putin has already called The Ukraine NATO's proxy army and everyone in Russia believes him so I don't see what difference it makes.

No.
Not nearly everyone in Russia believes Putin. Most Russians know that the state media is nothing but propaganda. The US sending arms to Ukraine would not only be futile (Ukraine already has huge stockpiles of equipment and a huge domestic armaments industry) and only making the conflict worse, it would also make Putin's lies true and antagonise even the most liberal Russians.
If the US really wants to help, they must send money to Ukraine, huge loads of money, because that is what they lack. Not weapons.

Hey wasn't there one of those in Siberiade!?

Remember that time that the US armed what would turn out to be ISIS?

Compared to that the idea that the US is sending weapons covertly is hardly the stuff of fantasy.

Blackwater, while a PMC, are there at least.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised. The state of the Ukrainian Army was extremely bad even before the crisis. Now that almost half the Army went to the seperatist side they had to fill up those losses with untrained (and mostly unmotivated) conscripts.
It has been reported several that the government had trouble feeding its troops, much less paying them.
The Ukrainian government mostly relies on fanatical volunteer militias of radical nationalists such as the Azov Batallion to do the fighting.

I'm sure the Little Green Men aren't hurting either

 Medium of Death wrote:
Remember that time that the US armed what would turn out to be ISIS?

Actually, I don't. I remember the part where they armed some of the moderate anti-al-Assad forces, and I'm sure some of that support ended up in what would become ISIS. That's a far cry from what you're claiming.

Those "volunteers" are well armed: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31146595

A worry now is that during Carter's SECDEF confirmation hearing he advocated for arming the Ukrainians. That provides a lot of incentive for Putin to step it up before this could happen.

I honestly wish Obama would be more firm on the subject. Threaten to do/actually do a complete embargo on Russia. Seize Russian government assets that are in the US. Threten to send in our own "volunteers". Something. Anything.