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.

 Freakazoitt wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Actually? It IS an "invasion" when those tank crews are saying that they were ordered to go.

You understand, in any case, that you are not the hero in this thread right? You're not "exposing" anything to Westerners who have been lied to or any of the nonsensical ranting you've engaged in.

You are the villain here. An apologist for a government that has a history of engaging in exactly the kinds of activities which you laid at the feet of the Western nations that you claimed are "bullying" the poor Russian government.

Oh, so you an american lawbringer, who decide who is evil and should be punished?
Point at some country and saying "they are evil! they are orcs! we shoud make humanitarian bombing on them to purify by fire and turn them into democracy".
You feel yourself a sacred inquisitor, or maybe even God?
I won't speak now about war crimes which committed the USA. but don't forget: Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
Both of us are ordinary citizens who can be not agree with the our governments, but both of us aren't interested in actions against the our countries.
please, no gloating

I love how you attack the poster instead of the argument.

What the United States has or has not done is not relevant to this thread nor this discussion. What Russia has done and is doing? That's relevant.

I really want to hammer this home so posters can see:
This kind of blatant ignorance? This is the mentality of the Russians I've had the sincere displeasure of having met. They feel like THEY are the victims of the world stage, that somehow THEY deserve to be a superpower again.

So please. Tell me what "actions against Russia" necessitated the covert redeployment of Russian troops into Ukraine? How about "actions against Russia" by Georgia in 2008?

What argument? You found one dismissed tankist, who went there, because someone said "we are going to fight ukrainians" (which is based only on rumors) with probably some tank (again, just rumors).

What the United States has or has not done is not relevant to this thread nor this discussion.

Why not? USA supports one side of conflict in Ukraine. I don't know, than this help will end. What if suddenly again will arrange chaos and then will leave like they did before.

What Russia has done and is doing? That's relevant.

Russia is not participating in Ukraine conflict. some unclear volunteers aren't count. Just like serbians, french volunters, one american

This kind of blatant ignorance? This is the mentality of the Russians I've had the sincere displeasure of having met. They feel like THEY are the victims of the world stage, that somehow THEY deserve to be a superpower again.

No, Russia want multipolar world. "Russian superpower" is media cliche, like "Soviet tanks invasion".

How about "actions against Russia" by Georgia in 2008

I hope you know, how this conflict started.

Do you actually know how the conflict between Russia and Georgia started in 2008?


Hint: It wasn't because Russia was "threatened".

Threatened by destroying peacekeepers unit and killing ossetians? You know about 2008 only from "yellow" press and troll bloggers?

It was threatened by Georgia almost becoming NATO. Buffer zones are important.

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Threatened by destroying peacekeepers unit and killing ossetians? You know about 2008 only from "yellow" press and troll bloggers?

Peacekeepers which, according to Georgian police, opened fire on them first?

And yes, they were "killing Ossetians". Ossetia was in the midst of a pretty nasty secession from the country of Georgia. Ossetians were killing Georgians too, y'know.
Russia retroactively granting citizenship to Ossetians does not mean that they had any leg to stand on for their invasion in any case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyran wrote:
It was threatened by Georgia almost becoming NATO. Buffer zones are important.

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppresors, comrade!

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppresors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppressors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppressors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

Doesn't matter, Ossetia was de facto independent and recognized by Russia, the local power.

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppressors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

Doesn't matter, Ossetia was de facto independent and recognized by Russia, the local power.

No, what doesn't matter is that Ossetia with backing from Russia CLAIMED it was independent.

If Minnesota withdrew from the United States with Canada's backing, it doesn't mean that Minnesota is its own nation.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppressors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

Doesn't matter, Ossetia was de facto independent and recognized by Russia, the local power.

No, what doesn't matter is that Ossetia with backing from Russia CLAIMED it was independent.

If Minnesota withdrew from the United States with Canada's backing, it doesn't mean that Minnesota is its own nation.

Of course no, because America and it's military. But sadly for Georgia, it isn't the local power, Russia is.

Good god. I guess this is what state controlled media does to the russians.

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppressors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

Doesn't matter, Ossetia was de facto independent and recognized by Russia, the local power.

No, what doesn't matter is that Ossetia with backing from Russia CLAIMED it was independent.

If Minnesota withdrew from the United States with Canada's backing, it doesn't mean that Minnesota is its own nation.

Of course no, because America and it's military. But sadly for Georgia, it isn't the local power, Russia is.

The point.

You missed it.

Are you sure your flag shouldn't read Russia instead of Mexico?

 Freakazoitt wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Actually? It IS an "invasion" when those tank crews are saying that they were ordered to go.

You understand, in any case, that you are not the hero in this thread right? You're not "exposing" anything to Westerners who have been lied to or any of the nonsensical ranting you've engaged in.

You are the villain here. An apologist for a government that has a history of engaging in exactly the kinds of activities which you laid at the feet of the Western nations that you claimed are "bullying" the poor Russian government.

Oh, so you an american lawbringer, who decide who is evil and should be punished?
Point at some country and saying "they are evil! they are orcs! we shoud make humanitarian bombing on them to purify by fire and turn them into democracy".
You feel yourself a sacred inquisitor, or maybe even God?
I won't speak now about war crimes which committed the USA. but don't forget: Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
Both of us are ordinary citizens who can be not agree with the our governments, but both of us aren't interested in actions against the our countries.
please, no gloating

I think you're projecting.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Except that wasn't why Russia invaded Georgia, now was it?

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppressors, comrade!

Except that Ossetia already was independent (of Georgia, not so much from Russia), they were actually defending it.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

Doesn't matter, Ossetia was de facto independent and recognized by Russia, the local power.

No, what doesn't matter is that Ossetia with backing from Russia CLAIMED it was independent.

If Minnesota withdrew from the United States with Canada's backing, it doesn't mean that Minnesota is its own nation.

Of course no, because America and it's military. But sadly for Georgia, it isn't the local power, Russia is.

The point.

You missed it.

Are you sure your flag shouldn't read Russia instead of Mexico?

Can you please refrain from accusing everybody that disagrees with you of being Russian? Its rude.

And I think you missed his point.

Sure, if a region withdraws from a country with another nation's backing (Ossetia and Russia) it doesn't become its own state recognised under international law. But it does become a de facto independent "rogue" State, if no one is willing to enforce said international law and stop them seceding.

Theres a saying that goes... "Might makes Right".

I prefer my own version... "Might does not make right, but it does make Right irrelevant".

Russia is able to do this because no one has the power to stop them. International law doesn't mean anything when you have a powerful enough military to ignore it. Same goes for USA/UK and the Iraq War (arguably an illegal war).

 Kanluwen wrote:

The point.

You missed it.

Are you sure your flag shouldn't read Russia instead of Mexico?

Let's put an example involving Mexico. Less than 2 hundred years ago there was a Mexican state called Texas. Then it's population claimed that they wanted to become independent. Now, 2 wars latter they are part of the US. Lets go a little more back in time. Once upon a time the US, Mexico and the rest of the continent were part of the European empires, then they claimed freedom! and viva la Independencia!, a lot of people died and someone with wooden teeth became president.

Here, Ossetia claimed independence and Georgia claime the territory. And then Russia happened. The moral of the story? Ossetia had something to back their claim and Georgia didn't. And before you mention it, the rest of the world doesn't count as they didn't lift a finger to help Georgia.

 Freakazoitt wrote:


Russia is not participating in Ukraine conflict. some unclear volunteers aren't count. Just like serbians, french volunters, one american

Except when they're taking heavy equipment, in large amounts, that requires extensive logistical support to keep in the field. Either the Russian Federation has lost control of its armed forces and military units and logistical support elements are acting autonomously (which I doubt, the Russian military has not shown that kind of ill discipline or lack of control in living memory), or they're being actively ordered into the conflict.

So either Russia's military is facing extreme issues of discipline and command meltdownn with active duty soldiers abandoning their units without orders and taking Russian Federation military equipment with them (in which case, *EVERYONE* should be very worried), or they're being ordered to go.


One indicates issues of severe corruption, incompetence, and a failing of the state of the Russian Federation (which I don't think anyone wants to admit nor really have any basis for believing), the other indicates the active participation of the Russian Federation in the conflict.

There really aren't any other conclusions if one's admitting to soldiers leaving their units to go fight, particularly when they're bringing things like vehicles with them.

Definitely there are Russian troops in Ukraine. The question is how many.

Anyone tracking the quantity of arty/rocket munitions getting to the rebels?

Hint: They've shot through a LOT more than you could justify as having been captured from Ukrainian forces or made in the zones they hold. Tons and tons more.

Maybe that handful of volunteers snuck it across the borders in their pockets.

 CptJake wrote:

Maybe that handful of volunteers snuck it across the borders in their pockets.

Apparently someone forgot to do their brass and ammo checks at the last range

The other issue is that the Russian border is close enough that Russian artillery units inside Russia can fire into many of the conflict areas without ever having to cross into Ukraine themselves. All they need is to get someone with a cell phone and is capable of relaying coordinates into a proper position, and then Russian artillery on the other side of the border is entirely capable of bringing fire down on many of the areas where fighting occurred.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:



Apparently someone forgot to do their brass and ammo checks at the last range

Oh I can tell horror stories about that. Stories that had potentially career ending implications as the events were happening.

 Freakazoitt wrote:
What argument? You found one dismissed tankist, who went there, because someone said "we are going to fight ukrainians" (which is based only on rumors) with probably some tank (again, just rumors).

Actually he is currently receiving full pay for having been on duty while in the Ukraine, according to the Russian press. He actually somewhat concerned that they would claim they dismissed him while he was there, but.... they didn't.

Oh, and they were given medals 'For Military Valor':








Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyran wrote:
Definitely there are Russian troops in Ukraine. The question is how many.

Based on the tankers statements, about a battalion worth. According to the tankers, the battalion split into companies to cross the boarder, 10 tanks, three BMPs, a medical MTLB and 5 Ural trucks with ammo in each group. This is corroborated by video taken of Russian tanks entering Donbass some still bearing the while square tactical marking of the 5th.

Here are two tanks photographed in Donbass. you may notice that the white square on the back of the turret has been painted over.... .badly.







Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:

Oh I can tell horror stories about that. Stories that had potentially career ending implications as the events were happening.

Remember, kids, the baron's special recipe! 2 parts wheat flour, 1 part RDX. For a bagel that can double as a breaching charge. And with military grade coffee, you'll never taste the plastic explosives.

Kanluwen wrote:And yes, they were "killing Ossetians". Ossetia was in the midst of a pretty nasty secession from the country of Georgia. Ossetians were killing Georgians too, y'know.
Russia retroactively granting citizenship to Ossetians does not mean that they had any leg to stand on for their invasion in any case.

You think, georgians was allowed to kill ossetians in 2008, because they killed some georgians 15 years before? No!


sadly, you gon't unersteand georgian
they saying "shoot em all", "shoot every people"

No, they were coming to LIBERATE Ossetia from their cruel Georgian Oppresors, comrade!

Isn't it true? Georogians was stopped. Not only in Ossetia territory, but chased in Georgia too... a little bit. The goal of russian action was to stop them from devastating Ossetia. Nothing else.

Ossetia's independence was recognized by Russia, not Georgia or the rest of the world.

Georgia promised to not fight against Ossetia, but broke their promise. to destroy de-facto independence of Ossetia and to return it under Georgian control. They were hoped, that NATO will support them against Russia. That's why NATO presence is bringing disbalance in the world and instability. Without NATO, Saakashvilli wouldn't attack at all.

Tyran wrote:Definitely there are Russian troops in Ukraine. The question is how many.

One full Chairborn division.

Vaktathi wrote:The other issue is that the Russian border is close enough that Russian artillery units inside Russia can fire into many of the conflict areas without ever having to cross into Ukraine themselves. All they need is to get someone with a cell phone and is capable of relaying coordinates into a proper position, and then Russian artillery on the other side of the border is entirely capable of bringing fire down on many of the areas where fighting occurred.

well, it is only the theoretical assumption

BaronIveagh wrote:

It looks like train transportation marks. It should be same for Russia and Ukraine, as they succedors of USSR.

 Freakazoitt wrote:

It looks like train transportation marks. It should be same for Russia and Ukraine, as they succedors of USSR.

No.

Oh, and let me ask, how many Buryats live in Donbass?



And the guys who just can't be bothered. 5th armored patches on, truck with the white square behind them.

Does Russia still have national service? I'm always amazed that so many Russians who post about Ukraine and elsewhere are so au fait with Russian and former Soviet Bloc military markings on vehicles.

Quote wikipedia:

The two-year conscription term in force since 1967 continued unchanged after the Soviet Union dissolved until the mid-2000s. In 2006, the Russian government and Duma gradually reduced the term of service to 18 months for those who will be conscripted in 2007 and to one year from 2008 and to drop some legal excuses for non-conscription from the law (such as non-conscription of rural doctors and teachers, of men who have a child younger than 3 years, etc.) from 1 January 2008. Also full-time students graduated from civil university and having military education will be free from conscription from 1 January 2008.

Beats unemployment I guess, and means there's always a ton of guys at the ready to go make a showing whenever needed. The indoctrination's just a bonus.

Don't spam the thread with daft image only posts.

Interesting story from the Moscow Times

"Russia Disowns Soldiers Captured in Eastern Ukraine in May"

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russia-disowns-soldiers-captured-in-eastern-ukraine-in-may/525979.html

If the official stance is that Russia is not involved then any servicemen captured will be abandoned whatever the truth of the matter, they could be imprisoned as criminals not combatants which loses many privileges. It must be hard in the Russian army, they've always treated their men as disposable.