[Russian] Army wives urge Russia to come clean on soldiers in Ukraine

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

350 deployed from that village in the OP...and the defense ministry has found 8 of them?

Admittedly...some of the soldiers are easier to find than others..

Commanders from the base have told her several have returned dead, she said, and around 15 wounded soldiers were also flown back this week.

From the OP article...

There seemed also to be a lot of exaggeration about it, as we have seen constantly in MSM.

There are at least Russian volunteers, possible some regular Russian troops too, but there`s no real conformation about it. Besides MSM shouting lots of stuff which proved to be wrong lots of times, there`s not really solid information regarding volunteers or regulars...just some reasoning regarding the whole situation.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Nothing personal, but your post above indicates that you would significantly benefit from researching the situation before declaring what is known and not known or what is exaggerations.

The evidence amassed showing formal Russian involvement and troops in Ukraine is beyond the tipping point. It includes statements from Russian Soldiers, witness accounts, imagery of tanks and troops crossing the border etc.

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Nothing personal, but your post above indicates that you would significantly benefit from researching the situation before declaring what is known and not known or what is exaggerations.

The evidence amassed showing formal Russian involvement and troops in Ukraine is beyond the tipping point. It includes statements from Russian Soldiers, witness accounts, imagery of tanks and troops crossing the border etc.

I`ve seen the evidence and it all looks rather flimsy. I don`t let MSM shouting heads cloud my perception by greatly exaggerating things.

I do know from reports Russia started training people (Eastern Ukrainians and Russian volunteers) this spring for the attack. And they were probably brought in/ready for the recent offensive.

I have no idea how many Russians have volunteered, it might well be a couple of thousand, I would not be surprised of it.

The Separatist leaders speaking about Russians could have been just about Russian volunteers. But it also could be they didn`t had enough volunteers so they have send in also some regulars battalions of 400.

So you can only speculate about it with the information we have. It`s simply not clear how many were volunteers and/or how many regulars there were.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: [post=18378575]Indigo5

So you can only speculate about it with the information we have. It`s simply not clear how many were volunteers and/or how many regulars there were.

The rebel leader admitted to between 1500-3000 Russian troops being in Ukraine, albeit he claimed that they were there on "holiday".

Given the motivation for the Rebels to not publicly acknowledge the same, I see that as a safe, very conservative ground floor for the number of Russian troops fighting in Ukraine.

Russian Spec Ops have been captured in Ukraine..with one of the soldiers acknowledging on Camera that the Russian troops were in Ukraine..though Putin claims they go lost and wandered 30+ miles across the border.

You have this OP where 350 troops have been deployed on "maneuvers" with many returning dead or injured...according to the Russian Military itself..

What is your standard of clarity?

Dismissing facts as "MSM" is a convenient tactic for propaganda.

It is entirely possible to research and vet facts that are presented in the Mainstream Media as well as Putin's claims and come to objective conclusions.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: [post=18378575]Indigo5

So you can only speculate about it with the information we have. It`s simply not clear how many were volunteers and/or how many regulars there were.

The rebel leader admitted to between 1500-3000 Russian troops being in Ukraine, albeit he claimed that they were there on "holiday".

Given the motivation for the Rebels to not publicly acknowledge the same, I see that as a safe, very conservative ground floor for the number of Russian troops fighting in Ukraine.

Russian Spec Ops have been captured in Ukraine..with one of the soldiers acknowledging on Camera that the Russian troops were in Ukraine..though Putin claims they go lost and wandered 30+ miles across the border.

You have this OP where 350 troops have been deployed on "maneuvers" with many returning dead or injured...according to the Russian Military itself..

What is your standard of clarity?

Dismissing facts as "MSM" is a convenient tactic for propaganda.

It is entirely possible to research and vet facts that are presented in the Mainstream Media as well as Putin's claims and come to objective conclusions.

Captured soldiers giving statements for me have not much high value, because of the circumstances in which they give their statements. A few captured para-troopers "probably" on recon is not a major force.

And here is what I have been talking about :

Rebel leader in Ukraine says forces bolstered by '1,200 troops trained in Russia'

Pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine are being bolstered by 1,200 troops who “trained for four months in Russia”, according to the separatists’ leader.

A video recording of Alexander Zakharchenko speaking to delegates in the rebel-held city of Donetsk appeared to confirm reports of Moscow’s military support to the separatists, who have been fighting Ukrainian government troops since April.

www.telegraph.co.uk... html

It was already known from the spring Russia was training Separatists.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

On another note...Curious as to why you are so deeply skeptical of the independent "MSM" and yet offer a link to Russian State Media to disprove the same? Curious as to your standards for credibility which seem to include assigning veracity to the Russian Governments "Media" arm while discrediting all other independent sources?

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

On another note...Curious as to why you are so deeply skeptical of the independent "MSM" and yet offer a link to Russian State Media to disprove the same? Curious as to your standards for credibility which seem to include assigning veracity to the Russian Governments "Media" arm while discrediting all other independent sources?

Because MSM have been given primarily BS in the whole situation, as also with Syria, MH17 and lots of other stuff.

If MSM only gives about 90/95% truth, it`s very difficult to actually believe what`s coming from them. But it depends about what is reported if I think it can be believable coming from MSM. With the lack of solid reporting from MSM, I`m forced to go to reporting which has proved to be a bit more reliable regarding certain things.

I read both sides, but I can smell the BS from MSM pretty easy...and I refrain myself too much from going along with it.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

On another note...Curious as to why you are so deeply skeptical of the independent "MSM" and yet offer a link to Russian State Media to disprove the same? Curious as to your standards for credibility which seem to include assigning veracity to the Russian Governments "Media" arm while discrediting all other independent sources?

Because MSM have been given primarily BS in the whole situation, as also with Syria, MH17 and lots of other stuff.

If MSM only gives about 90/95% truth, it`s very difficult to actually believe what`s coming from them. But it depends about what is reported if I think it can be believable coming from MSM. With the lack of solid reporting from MSM, I`m forced to go to reporting which has proved to be a bit more reliable regarding certain things.

I read both sides, but I can smell the BS from MSM pretty easy...and I refrain myself too much from going along with it.

Of course they are training separatists they send troops there they work with separatists there were some volunteers from Ukraine. But the bulk of the forces are Russian soldiers who i guess we are to believe volunteered to go to Ukraine although apparently there families say something different. First clue was the first major battle and all the Coffins they had to send back to Russia by train. Even in Eastern Ukraine they dont want the Russian troops back and as Ukrainian forces retreat people in Eastern Ukraine are panicking the Russians will return. They havnt been very nice to the locals reports of stealing and looting and harassment.Watch the latest Vice news for example there scared the Russians are coming back

a reply to: Indigo5

My guess is, Russia has send in a couple of battalions (3/5, maybe some more, but not that many) together with fresh trained volunteers battalions (at least 3, maybe more). They joined the fighters already over in Eastern Ukraine and hit the "in an already horrible condition being unmotivated poorly lead Ukrainian army" in a brutal way (some kind of Blitzkrieg) and the Ukraine army disintegrated almost entirely, some have fled and are still defending some stuff, but not much is left of them. Russian battalions are 400 soldiers. So it would have been a relatively small scale operation for the Russians.

Ukraine and the West are exaggeration about the Russian involvement (they would have used more if needed, I have no doubt about that), because they are covering themselves about an actually humiliating defeat. Ukraine army lost so many heavy weapons during fighting the last couple of months, they were not even able to take on Lugansk and Donetsk. That`s why Ukraine army was only shelling those cities.

If Russia actual wanted to take Ukraine they would have come in with full force (Air force and all, and way more units). Kiev would be taken in days. They don`t have much Air-Force, heavy equipment and good trained motivated soldiers anymore. Te motivation part was also a huge problem with most Ukrainian army soldiers.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

On another note...Curious as to why you are so deeply skeptical of the independent "MSM" and yet offer a link to Russian State Media to disprove the same? Curious as to your standards for credibility which seem to include assigning veracity to the Russian Governments "Media" arm while discrediting all other independent sources?

Because MSM have been given primarily BS in the whole situation, as also with Syria, MH17 and lots of other stuff.

If MSM only gives about 90/95% truth, it`s very difficult to actually believe what`s coming from them. But it depends about what is reported if I think it can be believable coming from MSM. With the lack of solid reporting from MSM, I`m forced to go to reporting which has proved to be a bit more reliable regarding certain things.

I read both sides, but I can smell the BS from MSM pretty easy...and I refrain myself too much from going along with it.

Of course they are training separatists they send troops there they work with separatists there were some volunteers from Ukraine. But the bulk of the forces are Russian soldiers who i guess we are to believe volunteered to go to Ukraine although apparently there families say something different. First clue was the first major battle and all the Coffins they had to send back to Russia by train. Even in Eastern Ukraine they dont want the Russian troops back and as Ukrainian forces retreat people in Eastern Ukraine are panicking the Russians will return. They havnt been very nice to the locals reports of stealing and looting and harassment.Watch the latest Vice news for example there scared the Russians are coming back

I watched it.

There are people who are worried about war again in Mariupol. According to a Dutch reporter over there it`s divided, lots are also against Poroshenko.

The looting and harassment comes from the Ukrainian army, and in Komsomolsk they welcome DPR with open arms because of it.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Indigo5

If Russia actual wanted to take Ukraine they would have come in with full force (Air force and all, and way more units). Kiev would be taken in days. They don`t have much Air-Force, heavy equipment and good trained motivated soldiers anymore. Te motivation part was also a huge problem with most Ukrainian army soldiers.

Of course Russia could defeat Ukraine if they went full force. The reason they didn't invade full force is the same reason Putin is lying about his involvement..cowardice and reality. If Russia was honest with the world about it's intentions with Ukraine, they would immediately kick off a second cold war and potentially a "hot" war with neighboring NATO members. Either of which would be the end of Putin and set Russia back 50 years. That's just the facts.

a reply to: Nikola014

If you want proof, explain why Russian tanks have been seen inside Ukraine, specifically the modern versions of such vehicles (T-72 BM) that Ukraine does not have in its inventory but Russia does.Link

a reply to: Indigo5

Quite. Russia knows it couldn't win in a fight with NATO, despite the current underspend by many in the alliance, hence why they are using this strategy of "separatists" and covert incursions - like they have done before - to keep below the threshold of an international response.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Indigo5

Quite. Russia knows it couldn't win in a fight with NATO, despite the current underspend by many in the alliance, hence why they are using this strategy of "separatists" and covert incursions - like they have done before - to keep below the threshold of an international response.

i really dont think Europe is going to go for round 3 on appeasement and then having to slug it out to push Russia out of Europe again.

As for Russians threats of nukes - Its is exactly because the Russian military is not up to par with the west overall.

As for the pro Russians who want nuclear Armageddon. If anyone uses nukes, no one wins.

Hence the term MAD.

nuclear fallout does not stop at the border.

a reply to: Indigo5

Please show us images of tanks and/or troops crossing Russian border and entering Ukrainian. Stop spreading false information as facts.

Witness accounts? That's not true yet again. All we have is a few testimonies on blogger and facebook that could very easily be made up storiest and that's it.

And there was no denial that there are Russian volunteers fighting with their people in Ukraine. It doesn't mean that they were sent by Kremlin.

You assume things based of Kiev's accusations and nothing more. You can't provide any solid independent proof for your claims. So stop spreading them as facts.

The rest of you. Please give us more BBC, CNN proofs.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Indigo5

If Russia actual wanted to take Ukraine they would have come in with full force (Air force and all, and way more units). Kiev would be taken in days. They don`t have much Air-Force, heavy equipment and good trained motivated soldiers anymore. Te motivation part was also a huge problem with most Ukrainian army soldiers.

Of course Russia could defeat Ukraine if they went full force. The reason they didn't invade full force is the same reason Putin is lying about his involvement..cowardice and reality. If Russia was honest with the world about it's intentions with Ukraine, they would immediately kick off a second cold war and potentially a "hot" war with neighboring NATO members. Either of which would be the end of Putin and set Russia back 50 years. That's just the facts.

The west knows and have been told, no need for Putin to hide it :

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin allegedly declared at a NATO-Russia summit in 2008 that if Ukraine joined NATO his country could contend to annex the Ukrainian East and Crimea

en.wikipedia.org...

The West knows if push comes to shuffle Russia uses tactical nukes on troops, carriers and bases, just as what would have happened in `63 if US would have invaded, there was a nuke ready for US troops, see video :



Once the tactical nukes come into play, NATO isn`t all that powerful anymore and they know it.

If Russia was honest with the world about it's intentions with Ukraine, they would immediately kick off a second cold war and potentially a "hot" war with neighboring NATO members.

Already happened.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Well your right we could be looking at the start of a war but to call it a world war may be an over exaggeration. Right now this is a war between two countries Russia and Ukraine. What actions NATO takes could escalate the conflict but even than a world war involves several countries on both sides. Russia has no allies in this no one is willing to back up the Russians on an invasion of another country. Realize to NATO this isnt any different than two other countries slugging it out in other parts of the world with one exception. Russia was supposed to be an international leader meaning they are not supposed to violate international law and ignore treaties they signed.

a reply to: dragonridr

If you believe that Russia should behave, you also believe it should go for the West, now don`t you ?

Who attacked and invaded Afghanistan, Iraq and Libia, and aren`t they sovereign nations ?

And who also supplied "rebels" with weapons ?

NATO is involved now with sending in weapons and advisers (how many times we haven`t seen that before as the beginning of an US war...Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Libia, etc.)

So it`s hypocritical to only condemn Russia for doing the same don`t you think ?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

All three of those operations took place with broad international support and under the authority of UNSC resolutions, which means Russia and China were on board.

What was your point?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Who attacked and invaded Afghanistan, Iraq and Libia, and aren`t they sovereign nations ?

Well let's see...

In Christmas 1979, Russian paratroopers landed in Kabal, the capital of Afghanistan. The country was already in the grip of a civil war. The prime minister, Hazifullah Amin, tried to sweep aside Muslim tradition within the nation and he wanted a more western slant to Afghanistan. This outraged the majority of those in Afghanistan as a strong tradition of Muslim belief was common in the country.

www.historylearningsite.co.uk...

If you want to go in that direction let's look then shall we...

1944 Invasion of Hungary
1944 Invasion of Yugoslavia
1944 Invasion of Bulgaria
1945 Invasion of Slovakia
1945 Invasion of Croatia
1968 Invasion of Czechoslovakia
1979 Invasion of Afghanistan
1990 Transinistra
1999 Invasion of Chechnya
2008 Invasion of Georgia
2014 Invasion of Crimea

Now were these not sovereign nations that Russia decided to invade?

And who also supplied "rebels" with weapons ?

Well if your talking about the rebels in Ukraine( as this is a thread about Ukraine ), because that would be Russia.

NATO is involved now with sending in weapons and advisers (how many times we haven`t seen that before as the beginning of an US war...Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Libia, etc.)

Interesting but the last time I checked those countries used soviet made arms such as the famed AK, which btw is one of the most used weapons in that part of the world.

But I guess the US supplied them just to frame Russia, right?

Just in case you didn't know the AK 47 is the number one military rifle used in the world.

1. AK-47 – Semi or Fully Automatic Assault Rifle

The AK-47 is without a doubt the #1 rifle in the history of weapons. Well over 75 million of these assault rifles have been manufactured throughout the world. It is believed the AK-47 has inflicted more lethal shots than any other produced weapon. The AK-47s design was based on the German Sturmgewehr chambering an intermediate round and using stamped parts, making it both easy and inexpensive to produce. The AK-47 also proved to be easy to maintain and could survive just about every type of condition it was thrown into. The amount of fire (600 rounds per minute) compensate for its average accuracy. The AK-47 has a 7.62 x 39mm caliber with a cartridge capacity of 30 and an average muzzle velocity of 2,329 feet/second.

The AK-47 is the most reliable assault rifle every made. In fact it can be speculated that 200 years from now someone will still be carrying this assault rifle.

armedforcesmuseum.com...

But of course it's all NATO's fault because hey Russia is innocent and doesn't do that sort of thing, right?

So it`s hypocritical to only condemn Russia for doing the same don`t you think ?

No because neither NATO or the west have yet to supply Ukraine with any weapons unlike what Russia has doing with the separatists.