It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
TritonTaranis
khimbar
Wait, the Russians are keeping their own military equipment, at their own military bases, inside their own borders? And their own aeroplanes at their own aerodromes? Inside their own country?
The inhuman fiends.
This clearly changes everything. We should probably bomb them or something.
So first you deny it, then when proven otherwise claim the pictures are fake? Lol
Fylgje
Russia is probably preparing for some military exercises. I'm still waiting for the propaganda machine to start comparing Putin to Hitler.
Britguy
Looking at the numbers and equipment in those images, it sure doesn't look like an invasion force.
Looks more like units on exercise, which we know Russia was running not so long ago, and some of which have since returned to their home bases, thus reducing what was never even close to an invasions strength force!
I guess the press need a story to wag in front of us all though.
TritonTaranis
The point were all at now is why is it still there, Russia has denied it is there NATO has provided evidence of it being there HTH
TritonTaranis
Britguy
Looking at the numbers and equipment in those images, it sure doesn't look like an invasion force.
Looks more like units on exercise, which we know Russia was running not so long ago, and some of which have since returned to their home bases, thus reducing what was never even close to an invasions strength force!
I guess the press need a story to wag in front of us all though.
NATO commanders and US commanders with a considerable bit more knowledge that you say otherwise
There is 40,000 troops sitting just of the main roads into Ukraine, in 100 make shift bases, with tanks, amour, attack helos, fighter jets, and bombers, what more would you say was needed to be an invasion force? as I think it's pretty obvious it's perfectly kitted out to be so
online.wsj.com...
TritonTaranis
NATO commanders and US commanders with a considerable bit more knowledge that you say otherwise
There is 40,000 troops sitting just of the main roads into Ukraine, in 100 make shift bases, with tanks, amour, attack helos, fighter jets, and bombers, what more would you say was needed to be an invasion force? as I think it's pretty obvious it's perfectly kitted out to be so
online.wsj.com...
TritonTaranis
Britguy
Looking at the numbers and equipment in those images, it sure doesn't look like an invasion force.
Looks more like units on exercise, which we know Russia was running not so long ago, and some of which have since returned to their home bases, thus reducing what was never even close to an invasions strength force!
I guess the press need a story to wag in front of us all though.
NATO commanders and US commanders with a considerable bit more knowledge that you say otherwise
There is 40,000 troops sitting just of the main roads into Ukraine, in 100 make shift bases, with tanks, amour, attack helos, fighter jets, and bombers, what more would you say was needed to be an invasion force? as I think it's pretty obvious it's perfectly kitted out to be so
online.wsj.com...
The satellite images released by NATO that allegedly show a current build-up of Russian troops near Ukrainian border were taken in August 2013 amid military drills, a source in the General Staff of the Russian Army has said.
Phage
reply to post by kloejen
That's why satellite photos are used for surveillance. Ground surveillance is very limited in scope.
Did you notice that the locations of the satellite photos are marked?
Driving along a highway...brilliant.
Are you taking the position that the satellite images are faked? Just curious.
edit on 4/10/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Davian
Nope. More NATO bull#.
rt.com...
TritonTaranis
Wow good find
I guess Nicholas Balabaev is giving Mr Putin a major facepalm moment
kookoos
You do realise it is easy to edit 1) metadata and 2) overlay's and watermarks, especially if you are the originator of the said images.
I would prefer to see independent imaging from some other (or indeed multiple) sources.
Is there any way to confirm the actual image date based on the aircraft and ground feature SHADOWS? or even the green features for season information in the region.
edit on 11-4-2014 by kookoos because: (no reason given)
NATO DEFENDS ACCURACY OF SATELLITE IMAGES WITH ADDITIONAL PROOF
11 Apr 2014
Mons, BELGIUM - Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) defends the accuracy of the images (found below) that were released to media on Thursday, 10 April 2014. The dates of the images released by SHAPE were collected by the DigitalGlobe satellite 'Constellation' between late March and early April 2014. The images are unclassified and are commercially available in DigitalGlobe's public archive. SHAPE did not alter or edit the images in any way prior to release.
Russian officials are quoted in various media sources claiming that these images were from August 2013, and that they depict an exercise conducted at that time.
SHAPE is releasing additional images alongside those that were released earlier, in order to clearly show that the claims of Russian officials are categorically false. These images, also taken from the DigitalGlobe satellite and commercially available, show the same areas of interest prior to any military build-up. The photographs, some dating from 2013, and others from early 2014, show that these areas were unoccupied prior to March 2014. There is no evidence of any military activity in these areas in 2013 or early 2014.
When reviewed alongside images released by SHAPE earlier today, it is clear that the military build-up of forces occurred in early March 2014.
SHAPE stands firm in its assessment that Russian forces in the vicinity of the border with Ukraine number in the range of 35,000 to 40,000 troops and are equipped with infantry fighting vehicles, tanks, combat aircraft, logistics, and artillery. These forces are destabilizing to the region, which is why the North Atlantic Council has repeatedly called upon Russia to de-escalate the situation by withdrawing troops from the border with Ukraine.
tommyjo
NATO DEFENDS ACCURACY OF SATELLITE IMAGES WITH ADDITIONAL PROOF
11 Apr 2014
Mons, BELGIUM - Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) defends the accuracy of the images (found below) that were released to media on Thursday, 10 April 2014. The dates of the images released by SHAPE were collected by the DigitalGlobe satellite 'Constellation' between late March and early April 2014. The images are unclassified and are commercially available in DigitalGlobe's public archive. SHAPE did not alter or edit the images in any way prior to release.
Russian officials are quoted in various media sources claiming that these images were from August 2013, and that they depict an exercise conducted at that time.
SHAPE is releasing additional images alongside those that were released earlier, in order to clearly show that the claims of Russian officials are categorically false. These images, also taken from the DigitalGlobe satellite and commercially available, show the same areas of interest prior to any military build-up. The photographs, some dating from 2013, and others from early 2014, show that these areas were unoccupied prior to March 2014. There is no evidence of any military activity in these areas in 2013 or early 2014.
When reviewed alongside images released by SHAPE earlier today, it is clear that the military build-up of forces occurred in early March 2014.
SHAPE stands firm in its assessment that Russian forces in the vicinity of the border with Ukraine number in the range of 35,000 to 40,000 troops and are equipped with infantry fighting vehicles, tanks, combat aircraft, logistics, and artillery. These forces are destabilizing to the region, which is why the North Atlantic Council has repeatedly called upon Russia to de-escalate the situation by withdrawing troops from the border with Ukraine.
Additional images have been published on the website.
www.aco.nato.int...