Jump to content

Na Vaske

Members
  • Posts

    103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Na Vaske

  1. Heh :D

    Obama makes a statement... Fox spends the next few days telling us how the world is going to end because of what he said, MSNBC thinks we're all saved, and NPR examines both sides and concludes nobody is right or wrong.

    Putin makes a statement... Russian media repeats it then moves on to remind the world that the CIA invented Ebola, HIV, and probably that nasty toe fungus I see in magazine ads telling me they can cure it.

    There is certainly a difference, even though in both cases the average person in both countries would rather watch (fill in blank) reality TV show than think.

    Steve

    While I understand your point, and agree with the spirit of it, its not completely true about Russian media. The Russian version of 'reality TV' in your scenario is probably foreign TV series streaming on the internet. However, the people who 'want to think' as you put it, don't pay attention to the mass media - they get news from many different independent media outlets in the country.

    The Russian media sources I see quoted by the Western media are often the least trusted, always ridiculed, and generally viewed as completely unreliable by the general public. You can talk all you want about the Russian media, but don't forget about the audience of it - a people who have never had a media that could be trusted. Nobody here views the news as the news - it is viewed as the version of events somebody else wants you to believe. It is a different culture here, you can't use an American POV to judge how a Russian understands his or her own media.

  2. Agree with everything you said, but one thing to keep in mind is that Putin's decisions are just scary enough that he might *not* think it's silly, regardless of what his people would tell him.

    Ya' never know...

    No, this is more.. I don't even know the word for it, the idea of what Putin's actions would be or the kind of things he does gets greatly exaggerated and sometimes things are just said and believed because you know, he's Putin - of course he is a mainaical crazy man twirling his mustache waiting to nuke the world...

    The truth about Putin and the way things work in my country are people like him are concerned about their personal power. Toss a nuke and his power is gone. Really being president is a show off thing for him. He's not an idiot and he is not going to destroy his kingdom by throwing a hissy fit and launching nukes, certainly not over Ukraine.

  3. Russian military doctrine calls for a first-strike nuclear option when facing a superior conventional force. It's a well known and publicized fact. That is precisely why any kind of war between Russia and US over Ukraine is a fantasy that might be interesting model in a wargame; but should not be debated too seriously by adult men (or women).

    The idea of freely using nuclear weapons 'in desperation' especially against a nuclear armed power 'daring a full scale nuclear war' is quite silly. Doctrine or not - (which is a misunderstood doctrine) the scenario put forth in this game does not. Hegemony over Ukraine or the independence of Novorossiya is not worth the consequences of the use of nuclear weapons. Step foot on Russian soil, different story.

    In reality, war with NATO over Ukraine is not worth the consequences much the same for NATO, But the idea that Russia will just willy nilly throw around WMD (including chem) is just silly. Especially at a nuclear armed foe.

  4. The problem with an air war with Russia is USA / NATO would undoubtly win, it might take a month and we might loose 50 planes but we wipe the Russian Air Force out along with its navy. This would be such a disaster for them, that they would panic and launch tactical nukes in desperation daring us to to escalate and launch the ICBMs.

    This is my favorite misconception/stereotype about my country.

  5. Thanks for the info JonS.

    It is understandable for me as B-52 doesn't even have a targeting pod, so it's ability to independently identify targets is rather limited. They later did hang a Sniper TGP on the B-1 Lancer and apparently for good reason...

    If the pilot looked at his TGP imagery thought nothing of it and pickled it woulda meant a bigger system f*ck up i reckon.

    The B-52 has integrated use of the Sniper since 2013 and before that had the LITENING II pod starting in the mid 00's, the same time B-1 was fitted with the Sniper pod.

  6. Really, I think we're dating our theoretical Fulda Gap title too far forward. With CMSF and CMBS we've got plenty of opportunity to play with supertanks. I'd want to go back-back-back to the NATO of my childhood - the early late 60s - early 70s. M48s, Leopard 1s, M60A1s, Chieftains. Wouldn't it be fun to fight M47s versus T55s? Even going back that far we'd still have the then-top-secret T-64 'supertank' to content with. :)

    A post-Vietnam pre-Reagan setting would be really interesting, say 1976. The clashes between M113 inf and BMP inf would lead to some interesting situations.

  7. Cuirassier,

    Methinks though hast both the wrong "kov" and the wrong quote. I believe you're thinking of Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Sergey Gorshkov, who famously kept on his office wall this monitory line: "Better is the enemy of good enough."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Gorshkov

    Regards,

    John Kettler

    He himself attributed the quote to Voltaire, though who originally said it is up for debate I'd imagine.

  8. I told about events before August.

    That Russian sources are not credible, that activists are paid for such things. They regularly gave false or distorted information about local Russian events, such as elections or street protests.

    And about vacationers told Bolotov, not Putin.

    Most of facts sounds like "were reported..." Ok, may be my English language is poor to explain.

    In short - I heard about most of all that "reports", Ukrainian and made by Russian pro-western activists. They were discussed and considered to be bad (sometimes good) made fakes. There is a small piece of true - as probably there were some actions near border before August. But reporting of that piece is not enough for ultra-patriotic Ukrainians, they lie a lot, sometimes basing on something, more often without any base.

    Ukraine doesn't say true at all, when they speak about military operations. :)

    Ukrainian media language:

    "Two Russian special brigades attacking our positions!"= "Things go bad, we may retreat soon"

    "Our forces suffered some losses, 2 KIA, 10 WIA" = Multiply by 3

    "Russians lost 100 men KIA, 50 WIA!" = "Soldiers said, that our artillery hit someone"

    "Tochka-U missile killed 300 Russian soldiers!"= "We managed to launch Tochka missile"

    Militia at least report nothing, it they have nothing to report. Like now, about actions in the airport. May be because they have no money for a crowd of "journalists", that don't want to be mobilised and have to "fight" in internet. :) What about Russian media, they rarely report about military operations, more about shelling civilians and refugees.

    Another problem I have come across is translation/interpretation. I read or hear a statement in the original language and completely understand the intended meaning, then I see it in English interpreted incorrectly. BBC has even issued retractions on more than one occasion because of poor translations. One major reason for this is that these people (Kiev paramilitaries, separatists, civilians being interviewed etc.) aren't exactly speaking Pushkin's Russian and that combined with using a lot of colloquialisms and military jargon - so much meaning and context is being lost in translation and a lot of misunderstanding is occurring.

    Back in maybe May, before the media (outside of Russia) became aware of what Груз 200 meant, I saw it reported as 200 soldiers killed on more than one occasion.

  9. Equally deceitful? Which tree did you fall from? ;)

    Guys, before you start posting about this topic I would encourage you to go through all this thread ad to not make an ass out of yourselves.

    Steve has been a winner in this debate so far with his arguments. Contra arguments have been weak so far.

    I have read the entire thread, I have also read his sources in the original language, my native tongue. Inforesist has been a quite deceitful source since the beginning of its existence. Citing this site as a source is no better than using Cassad as one.

    Yes, all sides in this conflict have been equally deceitful. Probably the only truth in this whole affair is everyone is twisting the truth if not outright telling lies.

  10. Here is a most interesting article from Armor describing, in considerable detail, the nits and grits of operating and fighting T-72s in combat. The article talks about crew quality, autoloader issues, morale, operating procedures, tank survivability and mobility, why the T-72s were supplanted at times by T-62s and even T-55s. Also discussed is some tank combat executed in a very atypical fashion whose nearest equivalent would be a roving gun.

    http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/armor/armor-magazine/armor-mag.2001.ja/4chechen01.pdf

    Regards,

    John Kettler

    As a veteran of this conflict, I'd wouldn't disagree with what is written: only that it was a quite broad and general overview. We used tanks as mobile direct fire support, though admittedly my experience was mostly limited to blockpost duty and patrolling with little to no contact. Though I don't see the 2nd Chechen War having much in common with a war between the Russian Federation and NATO in 2017. Different forces, different objectives, different eras.

  11. There seem to be on balance groups of neo-nazis similarly proudly parading in Moscow.

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/11/russian-march-draws-thousands-haters-2014114161437560714.html

    Heck last night I disturbingly discoved the social secretary of a nearby local cricket club here in the UK is a proverbial goose stepping neo-nazi racist. Unfortunately ultra nationalists throughout Europe are gathering under a similar banner.

    The difference is the Ukrainians were legitimized by the government allowing their paramilitary units to be absorbed into the ATO, however I think this was a political measure as they were poorly trained and suffered high levels of casualties thus cutting down the number of possible militant vocal trouble makers drastically when their extreme nationalist concerns are subsequently ignored by the government.

  12. The problem with the claims of full units of the Russian military fighting openly in Ukraine comes down to the units that have been said to be fighting. By the very nature of the conflict Russian leadership would never commit regular contractors to fight in a clandestine war they want to have deniability about. I was a contractor for 6 years in a motorized infantry unit. We don't have any code of secrecy indoctrinated into us. We talk. A lot. Russians as a society is very guarded with secrets and the rank and file are not trusted. Regular army brigades are not going to be committed to a clandestine war. It just goes against the Russian soul.

    Now, I am not an idiot - I'm convinced there was aid given by the military - training, planning, equipment, intelligence, probably leadership at the unit level. I have no doubt that men were probably granted leave to go to Ukraine and fight - though I also don't doubt that they were indeed volunteers. I don't doubt that artillery was fired into Ukraine - it was part of the mutual provocations on the border (the captured VDV guys were part of this) There were patrols by both sides beng done on both sides of the border and both Ukraine and Russia fired artillery (several incidents of Russian soldiers killed in Russia by Ukrainian artillery were ignored by BBC and the like).

    My educated opinion:

    Was the uprising in Donbass orchestrated by Russia - No, but inspired by Russian actions.

    Were/are the Rebels controlled by Moscow? Um murky, but yes-no. Too many loosely aligned factions. Some were proxies, some were 'legitimate' rebels, some were volunteers from abroad inspired by the cause. The initial senior leadership was not. The current more than likely is.

    Were/are the Rebels supplied with arms, equipment including tanks and IFVs, intelligence, leadership etc. by the Russian government? Yes.

    Were/are the Rebels also funded, armed, and supplied by normal citizens of the Russian Federation? Yes.

    Did Russian soldiers fight in Ukraine? Yes.

    Did entire units of regular soldiers fight in Ukraine? No.

    Did rebels train in Russia with the blessing of the government? Yes.

    Were rebels trained in Russia by a cadre made up of active duty Russian soldiers? I can't say, but more than likely yes.

    Did rebels stage out of Russia for their August counter-offensive? More than likely, though not certain if they started the march from inside Russia.

    Was the counter offensive planned by Russian leadership? More than likely completely planned.

    I've come to these conclusions based on my personal experience and reading countless reports from many different sources and watching hours up on hours of video in the original language. I'm not saying I'm 100% right, just my feeling about it all.

  13. Western media also criticises the current and past governments. That does not happen on RT.

    RT- I catch it because it does show military clips that are not on other channels. But the shear level and constant output of anti-western does concern me. Especially as they dress up wacky conspiracy theories as documentary-news.

    That doesn't happen on RT because it is a government mouthpiece, I'm convinced it was created solely to troll foreigners anyway. I'm not aware of anyone who watches this station, I'm not even sure I have it. Believe it or not we do have news that is critical of the current government, though I must admit I, like most my age and younger (I'm nearly 40) don't watch the news, other than sports maybe. You also need to look at Russian news from the frame of reference of a Russian - it is hard to find a Russian who is not cynical about mainstream news or one who believes they are getting the truth or at least the entire truth. I don't think there has been a time in this country's history where the news has been trustworthy or trusted. Discounting and not trusting the news is part of the culture.

  14. RT is still claiming there are no Russian troops at all in Ukraine, when the evidence that Russians troops are fighting and dying in Ukraine is now too widespread to be deniable.

    Bringing up RT, CNN, BBC, or whatever has nothing to do with the fact that Elena Vasilyeva is crap, always has been and always will be. All of her information is discredited and proven false quite quickly. She is actually a detriment to Russians with dissenting opinions.

    BTW, not everyone with a dissenting opinion is harassed or jailed. I have a large bookmark list of dissenting blogs by authors that do not attempt to hide their identity. They have been posting for years, and have not been beaten, jailed, etc. While there is certainly a lot to be desired in the realm of freedom of speech in this country - it is not the police state cracking down on anyone that dissents that seems to be portrayed in western news sources.

  15. Russian GRU became to "leak" for Vasilyeva fake information in order for further "disclosure" of her information and in such way for defamation of any info about Russian troops involvement. Alas, Vasilyeva can't differ where true info and where GRU trap, so her information can assume, but thoroughly to filter.

    I think the origin of her football club list was VK, one of the countless lists of 200s that were being copy pasted on everybody's page. On a side note, when these lists began appearing, suddenly the European and American media began to explain what груз 200 and груз 300 meant, though they often translated it as the literal meaning and not the colloquial meaning.

  16. That is what the Kremlin alleges, but it has a long history of smearing and jailing anyone who does not follow the Party line.

    Yelena Vasilyeva is certainly a more credible source than Russia Today. :P

    No, that is not what the Kremlin alleges, it is what reality shows. There are plenty of credible and legitimate activists (whom are not jailed, btw) but Lenka Vaska is not one of them. If you want to play conspiracy theorist you might think she was actually an agent of the Kremlin working to discredit dissident activism. That is how untrustworthy anything she says is.

  17. 1. I live in the West, and would love to hear much more from independent Russian sources. So please do post anything when you can.

    2. Agreed it is difficult sometimes to screen out the propaganda, personal, and sociological biases. But many of us prefer the truth so strive to balance these and be as objective as possible.

    3. "As well as many other economic hardships that aren't even connected to the diplomatic spats over sanctions". Please do tell us, or list examples of the other economic impact.

    As for 3, it is a bit off topic, but state pension funds are being 'borrowed' from to bring Crimean infrastructure and administration up to the RF standard, which is not an incredibly high standard. By all accounts though things were ignored completely in Crimea and now must be fixed all at once, mainly for political reasons. Already low pensions have been in some cases lowered or in most cases frozen, despite coming inflation. It is an unfortunate situation.

  18. It appears to be this one, which is 2nd hand from a friend who helps me with research:

    I believe the website he got it from is this one:

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/gruz200/

    And an article about the website:

    http://m.censor.net.ua/photo_news/303218/pod_debaltsevo_rossiyiskaya_svodnaya_gruppa_21yi_otdelnoyi_motostrelkovoyi_brigady_popala_pod_artobstrel

    I did find some notes of my own from the 19th of September:

    I found some other notes about #1 above that mention the Russian force was a supply unit. I do not have a link, but the source was a Russian activist by the name of Yelena Vasilyeva.

    Sorry I don't have better information than that!

    Steve

    I live in Russia and am not what some one would call a supporter of the Russian government, and completely disagree with the annexation of Crimea- (it has nearly destroyed the Russian domestic tourism industry with the government trying to pressure companies to convince people to visit Crimea, it lead to the bankruptcy of several long standing tour companies.) As well as many other economic hardships that aren't even connected to the diplomatic spats over sanctions I must tell you - Yelena Vasilyeva is an awful, awful source to use, as well as censor.net.ua.

    It seems that you are using sources that are definitely skewed one way that are not fully trustworthy (which is typical on all sides) It is the same as reading a report from Motorola that his unit destroyed 20 enemy tanks in 15 minutes (a common report) and taking it as the truth.

    I could list plenty of stuff from the other point of view (with the same level of reputation of the sources you posted) that are going to say completely different things. I guess it boils down to this, if you are convinced of a certain narrative - you are going to believe those sources.

    Edit: As a side, Steve since you are an administrator, could you tell me why to access any BF page no matter where I am trying to access it from I must use VPN software and change my IP to outside of Russia?

×
×
  • Create New...